UC-NRLF 


SB    1M    7SD 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

OF" 


Class 

'  -, 


THE  INFLECTION  OF  THE  ENGLISH 
PRESENT  PLURAL  INDICATIVE 


WITH  SPECIAL  REFERENCE  TO  THE 
NORTHERN   DIALECT 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED   TO   THE   BOARD   OF   UNIVERSITY   STUDIES    OF 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  IN  CONFORMITY 

WITH  THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE 

OF  DOCTOR   OF   PHILOSOPHY 


BY 

JOHN  DAVID   RODEFFER 


BALTIMORE: 

JOHN    MURPHY    COMPANY 
1903 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE. 

PREFACE v 

INTRODUCTION. — A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  THE  VIEWS  CONCERNING  THE  ORIGIN 
AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  MIDDLE  ENGLISH  INFLECTION  OF  THE 

PRESENT  INDICATIVE  PLURAL 1 

A. — THE   INFLECTION   OF  THE   PRESENT   PLURAL  INDICATIVE  IN  THE 

SOUTH 2 

B. — THE  INFLECTION  OF  THE   PRESENT   PLURAL   INDICATIVE   IN  THE 

MIDLAND 13 

C. — THE   INFLECTION  OF  THE  PRESENT  PLURAL   INDICATIVE  IN  THE 

NORTH 23 

I.     The  Leading  Explanations  of  the  Northern  Inflections 23 

II.     The  Historical  Development  of  the  Northern  Inflections  of  the  Present 

Plural  Indicative 30 

1.  The  Old  Northumbrian 30 

The  Durham  Ritual. 30 

The  Lindisfarne  Gospels. — Matthew 33 

Mark 34 

Luke 34 

John 35 

2.  The  Middle  Northern 38 

Cursor  Mundi 38 

The  Surtees  Psalter 40 

Richard  Rolle's  Pricke  of  Conscience 42 

Richard  Rolle's  Prose  Treatises. 44 

The  North  English  Legends 44 

Ywain  and  Gawain 46 

Lawrence  Minot's  Poems 47 

The  Lay  Folks'  Catechism 47 

The  York  Plays 48 

The  Towneley  Plays 50 

Wyntoun's  Orygynale  CronyUl 51 

Gilbert  of  the  Haye's  The  JBuke  of  the  Law  of  Armys, 

or  Buke  of  Bataillis 52 

Barbour's  Bruce 53 

Robert  Henryson's  Poems 54 

Dunbar'  s  The  Tua  Mariit  Wemen  and  the  Wedo 54 

The  New  Testament  in  Scots. — St.  Luke 55 

Gavin  Douglas. — Translation  of  the  Aeneid 56 

The  Complaynt  of  Scotlande 58 

Sir  David  Lyndsay. — The  Dreme  and  The  Testament 

and  Complaynt  of  the  Papyngo 58 

Additional  Texts 60 

CONCLUSION 61 

iii 


142 


PREFACE. 


When  the  study  of  historical  English  grammar  became  a 
comparatively  exact  science,  there  was  felt  to  be  a  need  for  an  in- 
vestigation of  the  dialectal  inflection  of  the  present  indicative  plural. 
The  long-continued  labors  of  Morris  marked  such  an  advance  in 
our  knowledge  of  English  grammar  that  since  his  day  the  inflection 
of  the  present  plural  indicative  has  been  regarded  as  one  of  the 
chief  tests  of  dialect.  But  important  though  the  establishment  of 
the  facts  was,  its  value  was  somewhat  impaired  by  the  failure  to 
explain  historically  the  dialectal  forms  of  this  inflection.  Such  an 
explanation  becomes  all  the  more  imperative  in  the  case  of  the 
Midland,  since  it  is  from  this  dialect  that  our  modern  uninflected 
present  plural  indicative  is  derived. 

But  it  is  in  regard  to  the  Northern  dialect  that  the  greatest 
uncertainty  has  prevailed  among  special  investigators,  in  spite  of 
the  valuable  positive  results  obtained  by  Murray.  For  example, 
in  Skeat's  edition  of  the  Kingis  Quair  (S.  T.  S.,  1884,  p.  xxx) 
the  following  assertion  is  made  concerning  the  form  stenten  in  the 
line,  And  quhen  I  wepe}  and  stenten  othir  quhile :  'It  is  a  transla- 
tion into  Chaucerian  language  of  the  Northern  word  styntis,  for, 
in  the  Northern  dialect,  the  phrases  I  stintis  and  we  stintis  were 
once  equally  correct.'  The  reader  is  here  led  into  the  belief  that 
in  the  Northern  dialect  the  inflected  form  in  -s  was  used  when  the 
verb  was  in  contact  with  a  personal  pronominal  subject,  whereas 
in  point  of  fact  the  uninflected  form  was  required,  just  as  in 
Modern  English.  He  is  further  confirmed  in  this  erroneous  im- 
pression by  a  similar  assertion  in  G.  Schleich's  Ywain  and  Gawain 
(Oppeln  and  Leipzig,  1887,  p.  xvin) :  <  Moreover  the  ending  -s, 
-es  occurs  repeatedly,  although  never  assured  by  the  rime  :  compare 
we  suffers,  3044 ;  ye  thinkes,  1530,'  etc. 

Even  as  late  as  1898,  not  mere  vagueness  of  knowledge  but 
positive  inaccuracy  of  a  fundamental  kind  was  shown  by  this 
paradigm  in  the  Specimens  of  Early  English  (Morris  and  Skeat, 

v 


vi  Preface. 

Fourth  edition,  Oxford,  1898,  p.  xxxi) :  ' Plural— 1.  love;  2. 
loves ;  3.  love ;  loves.'  Since  no  explanation  is  made  why  a  North 
countryman  says  we  love  but  ye  loves,  and,  at  the  same  time,  either 
they  love  or  they  loves,  the  student  is  left  to  the  possible  inference 
that  the  inflections  of  the  third  person  represent  a  sort  of  arith- 
metical summing  up  of  the  forms  of  the  other  two  persons. 

Finally,  it  must  be  urged  that  writers  who  recognize  the  influence 
of  a  personal  pronominal  subject  upon  the  form  of  the  verb  with 
which  it  is  in  contact,  should  be  more  careful  as  to  the  manner  of 
presenting  Northern  constructions,  whether  to  the  eye  of  the  special 
student  or  to  that  of  the  general  reader.  G.  Gregory  Smith  (Speci- 
mens of  the  Middle  Scots,  Edinburgh,  1902,  p.  xxxv)  very  truth- 
fully declares  that  '  The  error  that  all  the  persons  in  the  Northern 
present  tense  are  the  same  and  in  -s  still  holds  in  the  text-books ' ; 
yet  on  the  same  page  he  gives  as  the  inflections  of  the  different 
persons  when .  the  nominative  is  not  a  personal  pronoun  or  when 
the  verb  is  remote  from  its  personal  pronominal  subject :  Ifyndis, 
thow  fyndis,  he  fyndis,  we  fyndis,  ye  fyndis,  thay  fyndis.  Such  a 
method  of  presentation  can  not  be  distinguished  from  the  errors 
cited  at  first  and  should  be  systematically  avoided,  since  only  the 
second  and  the  third  of  the  forms  given  here  actually  occur  in  the 
original  texts. 


INTRODUCTION.-A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OP  THE 
VIEWS  CONCERNING  THE  ORIGIN  AND 
DEVELOPMENT  OP  THE  .MIDDLE 
ENGLISH  INFLECTIONS  OP 
THE  PRESENT  INDICA- 
TIVE PLURAL. 


Before  the  appearance  of  Matzner's  grammar  in  I860,  the  view 
concerning  the  varying  forms  assumed  by  the  present  indicative 
plural  of  the  verb  in  Anglo-Saxon  is  well  represented  by  Bos  worth 
and  Eask.  The  former  in  his  Anglo-Saxon  Grammar  (London, 
1823,  p.  146  ff.),  expresses  himself  to  this  effect : 

'  When  the  infinitive  ends  in  -an  with  a  vowel  before  it,  the  plural 
persons  end  in  -iaft :  as,  hingrian,  to  hunger,  hingriaft,  we,  ye,  they 
hunger ;  loyrian,  to  curse,  ivyriaft,  we,  ye,  they  curse.  If  it  end  in  -eon, 
they  are  formed  in  -eoft  :  as,  geseon,  to  see,  geseoft,  we,  ye,  they  see ;  but 
if  a  consonant  goes  before  -an,  then  they  end  in  -08 :  as,  pyrstan,  to 
thirst,  pyrstaft,  we,  ye,  they  thirst.  The  plural  persons  also  end  in  -en, 
-on,  -un,  as  well  as  -aft :  as,  witun,  witaft,  ye  wot,  or  know ;  nyton, 
nuuton,  nytaft,  ye  know  not.  It  is  sometimes  read  wutas,  ye  know,  and 
by  the  poets  wutoft,  for  they  often  use  the  termination  -oft  instead  of  -aft. 
The  plural  persons  often  end  in  the  same  manner  as  the  first  person 
singular,  especially  when  the  Saxon  pronoun  is  placed  after  the  verb  : 
as,  Hwcet  ete  ive,  what  shall  we  eat ;  Hu  fleo  ge,  how  shall  you  fly.' 

In  like  manner  Rask  explains  the  varying  forms  (Grammar  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  Tongue,  translated  by  B.  Thorpe,  Copenhagen, 
1830,  p.  71) : 

'  The  two  terminations  of  the  plural  indicative  and  imperative  are 
thus  distinguished  :  the  first  form  in  -aft  is  used  when  the  pronoun,  as 
subject,  precedes  or  is  omitted;  but  the  other  form  in  -e  when  the 
pronoun  follows.' 

On  page  170,  Rask  treats  of  dialectal  forms : 

'  In  Northumbrian  -s  is  often  used,  instead  of  -ft  or  -p,  in  the  termina- 
natiou  of  verbs.  Here  it  also  appears  that  the  difference  between  -aft 
and  -e  in  the  plural  is  lost.' 

1 


2      Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

The  first  edition  of  Matzner's  Englische  Grammatik  (Berlin, 
1860,  I,  323)  does  not  much  advance  our  knowledge  of  the  dialec- 
tal forms  of  the  present  indicative  plural.  After  a  paradigm  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  [West-Saxon]  forms  of  the  full  verb,  Matzner 
(as  I  translate)  has  the  following : 

The  suffixes  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  are  subjected  to  various  alterations 
and  substitutions  in  English.  .  .  .  The  three  persons  of  the  indicative 
plural  present  appear  as  -eth,  seldom  -oth  or  -uth :  We  honourep  Venus 
(Robert  of  Gloucester,  I,  112).  .  .  .  Later,  however,  there  occur  -es 
and  -is,  -ys  beside  -eth,  especially  in  the  North,  where  the  forms  fall 
together  with  the  third  person  singular :  We  er  richer  men  than  he,  and 
mor  gode  haues  (Percy  Eel.,  p.  93,  u).  ...  At  an  early  date  the 
plural  suffix  -en,  which  belonged  to  the  subjunctive,  appears  in  the 
indicative  as  well  as  in  the  subjunctive. 

In  the  second  edition  (1873),  only  the  last  sentence  has  been 
noticeably  modified  : 

At  an  early  date  the  plural  suffix  -en  appears  in  the  indicative, 
especially  in  the  Midland,  as  in  the  Low  German  dialects,  so  that  the 
indicative  seems  to  be  connected  with  the  Anglo-Saxon  subjunctive 
forms,  or  at  least  falls  together  with  them  :  We  hauen  misdo  milcel 
(Havelok,  2798) ;  Now  we  leuen  Joseph,  and  of  pe  kyng  carpen  (Joseph 
of  Arimathie,  175).  The  interchange  of  plural  forms  in  -en,  -es,  -eth 
and  forms  with  the  final  consonant  dropped  takes  place  gradually :  In 
glotonye  Go  thei  to  bedde  And  risen  with  ribaudie  (Alliterative  Poems, 
85).  .  .  .  Already  in  the  fourteenth  century  the  loss  of  the  inflec- 
tional ending  has  become  widespread ;  the  ending  -en  disappears  earlier 
from  the  subjunctive  and  the  indicative  than  the  ending  -eth  from  the 
latter. 

The  third  edition  of  Matzner  (1880)  repeats  the  second  without 
variation  in  all  that  is  said  concerning  the  inflection  of  the  present 
indicative  plural. 

Fiedler  (Wissenschaftliche  Grammatik  der  englischen  Sprache, 
Leipzig,  1861,  p.  47)  accounts  in  the  following  manner  for  the 
form  -en  in  the  present  indicative : 

The  inflection  of  the  present  indicative  plural  is  still  [1100-1250] 
-eft :  we  habbeft,  uo  clepiaft,  besides  which  there  also  appears  the  inor- 
ganic ending  -en.  It  was  probably  carried  over  from  the  preterit  into 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     3 

the  indicative  and  is  already  the  usual  inflection  in  the  Proverbs  of 
Alfred  and  the  semi-Saxon  homilies. 

Koch  attempts  an  historical  explanation  of  the  regular  West- 
Saxon  plural  form  in  his  Historische  G-rammatik  der  englischen 
Sprache  (Weimar,  1863,  I,  p.  336) : 

In  Old  Saxon  and  Anglo-Saxon  there  is  found  for  the  three  persons 
only  one  sign  ;  the  former  has  in  the  present  indicative  -d,  the  latter 
-ft.  Old  Saxon  -d  corresponds  to  the  Gothic  -and  and  would  therefore 
be  -ad ;  the  Anglo-Saxon  would  correspond  in  the  second  plural  to  the 
Gothic  -ip  and  it  is  surprising  that  in  the  older  tongue  the  i  should 
appear  weakened,  whereas  the  Anglo-Saxon  retains  -op. 

Koch  (p.  335)  notes  that  s-forms  occur  in  Northumbrian  in  the 
indicative  plural,  which  he  regards  as  a  degeneration  (Entartung) 
of  the  forms  in  -p. 

In  the  same  year  that  was  marked  by  the  appearance  of  Koch's 
grammar,  Morris  wrote  in  his  preface  to  Richard  Rolle's  Pricke 
of  Conscience  (published  in  the  Philological  Society1  s  Early  English 
Volume) ,  p.  XVIII : 

'  The  conjugation  of  the  Northumbrian  verb  is  extremely  simple, 
one  form  in  s  being  used  for  every  person  in  the  present  tense,  indicative 
mood.  It  is  moreover  a  test  by  which  Northumbrian  may  be  dis- 
tinguished from  other  dialects  of  the  North  of  England.  .  .  .  We 
have  occasionally  (thai)  loven  instead  of  (thai)  loves.  .  .  .  The 
Northumbrian  has  what  may  be  called  an  uninflected  imperative, 
conjugated  as  follows  :  Ga  I,  ga  thou,  ga  he;  ga  we,  ga  yhou,  ga  thai.' 

Morris  also  gives  grammatical  prefaces  for  the  West  Midland  in 
Early  English  Alliterative  Poems  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  1) ;  for  the  East 
Midland  in  The  Story  of  Genesis  and  Exodus  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  7)  and 
Old  English  Homilies,  Second  Series  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  53) ;  for  the 
Southern  in  The  Ayenbite  of  Inwyt  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  23),  Old  English 
Homilies,  First  Series  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  29) ;  and  An  Old  English 
Miscellany  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  49).  He  has  summed  up  the  results  of 
his  studies  in  the  Historical  Outlines  of  English  Accidence  (London, 
1873,  p.  173),  where  the  inflections  of  the  indicative  plural  present 

are  thus  given:  Southern eth;  Midland en;  Northern — 1. 

-(e)  •  2.  -(e)s ;  3.  -(e)s.     A  slight  change  in  presenting  these  inflec- 


4      Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

tions  is  seen  in  his  Specimens  of  Early  English  (Oxford,  1882, 1,  p. 
xxxvii)  :  Northern — 1.  hopes;  2.  hopes;  3.  hopes.  In  a  footnote 
to  this  passage,  Morris  says  the  Northern  dialect  often  drops  the 
-s  in  the  first  person,  and  the  Midland  the  -n  in  all  persons. 

These  paradigms  are  repeated  without  alteration  in  Specimens  of 
Early  English  (Morris  and  Skeat,  Oxford,  1898,  p.  xix),  but  on 
p.  xxxi,  the  Northern  present  indicative  plural  is  given  as — 1. 
love ;  2.  loves  ;  3.  love,  loves.  No  explanation  is  offered,  however, 
for  putting  these  double  forms  for  the  third  plural. 

The  problem  of  the  varying  forms  of  the  present  indicative 
plural  in  West-Saxon  was  discussed  by  Sweet  in  the  introduction 
to  King  Alfred's  West-Saxon  Version  of  Gregory's  Pastoral  Care 
(E.  E.  T.  S.,  50,  p.  xxxii) : 

'  Dropping  of  final — generally  inflectional — n  is  very  frequent  in  H 
[Hatton  MS.].  The  n  is  frequently  added  above  the  line,  but  often 
the  correction  is  neglected,  especially  towards  the  end  of  the  MS.  It 
is  the  n  of  the  infinitive,  weak  adj.  inflection,  and  subjunctive  that 
most  frequently  suffers  this  apocope.  .  .  .  Such  forms  as  ne  forbinden 
ge  (105.  7)  are  interesting  as  affording  an  explanation  of  the  wrell- 
known  difference  of  ending  which  depends  on  the  relative  position  of 
the  verb  and  its  personal  pronoun.  The  frequent  dropping  of  the  final 
n  has  been  noticed  above,  we  need  not  therefore  be  surprised  at  one 
MS.  having  ne  bredge  ge,  while  the  other  retains  the  final  n  (173.  10, 
compare  also  189.  23).  It  seems  not  improbable  that  these  curtailed 
forms  may  have  gradually  extended  their  range,  first  appearing  in 
imperatives  without  the  negation,  and  afterwards  in  all  cases  of 
pronominal  postposition.  That  the  hcebbe  ge,  wese  ge,  etc.  of  the 
grammars  are  of  comparatively  late  origin  is  shown  by  the  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  Pastoral  of  the  fuller  forms  habbaft  ge  (95.  11), 
weahsaft  ge  (109.  5),  beoft  ge  (201.  21).  An  example  of  the  later  form 
is  beo  ge  (189.  22)  in  bothJMSS.' 

A  similar  view  is  expressed  by  Sweet  in  An  Anglo-Saxon  Reader 
(Oxford,  1881,  p.  Ix)  and  A  New  English  Grammar  (Oxford,  1892, 
I,  365). 

Substantially  the  same  testimony  is  [given  in  Sievers's  Angelsdch- 
sische  Grammatik  (Halle,  1882,  §  360),  repeated  without  alteration 
in  the  second  edition  (1886)  but  modified  and  expanded  in  the  third 
edition  (1898)  [see  below,  Section  C]. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     5 

Cosijn  (Altwestsachsische  GrammatiJc,  Haag,  1888,  n,  p.  118) 
also  expresses  himself  to  the  same  effect : 

Wille  we,  wille  ge,  the  imperative  and  preterit  forms  in  -e  (the  latter 
with  indicative  significance :  ne  spilcte  ge)  prove  that  we  have  to  deal 
here  only  with  original  forms  in  -n  (-m)  ;  consequently  -n  and  not  -p 
has  been  dropped. 

The  occurrence  of  the  curtailed  form  in  the  preterit  indicative 
plural  is  explained  by  Cosijn  as  due  to  the  preterit  optative  plural 
used  as  an  indicative,  with  the  consequent  dropping  of  -w  in  the 
ending  -en  and  not  in  -on. 

The  testimony  of  Sweet,  Sievers,  and  Cosijn  is  further  strength- 
ened by  that  of  Professor  Bright  (Anglo-Saxon  Reader,  Third 
edition,  New  York,  1899,  p.  Ixii)  : 

'  When  the  pronominal  subjects  we,  we,  ge,  ye,  are  placed  immediately 
after  the  verb,  the  verbal  ending  is  often  (not  uniformly)  reduced  to  -e. 
Originally  this  form  was  in  all  probability  restricted  to  the  adhortative 
optative ;  the  -e  would  therefore  represent  a  reduction  of  -en.  But  in 
the  historic  periods  of  West-Saxon  the  indie,  pres.  and  pret.  and  the 
Imperative  (-aft  and  -on  also  giving  way  to  -e)  are  found  attracted  into 
this  usage. 

Thus,  we  (ge)  cweftaft,  but  cwefte  we  (ge) ;  we  (ge)  magon,  but  mage 
we  (ge) ;  we  (ge)  nimen,  but  nime  we  (ge) ;  we  (ge)  comon  (sohtori),  but 
eome  (sohte)  we  (ge).' 


A.-THE  INFLECTION  OP  THE  PRESENT  PLURAL 
INDICATIVE  IN  THE  SOUTH. 

To  sum  up  the  results  of  this  cursory  review,  supplementing 
with  fresh  material  whenever  expedient,  we  find  in  Early  West- 
Saxon  a  form  -(a)$  that  is  used  for  the  present  indicative  plural. 
c  The  stroke  of  the  •$ '  is  sometimes  omitted,  causing  the  ending  to 
appear  as  -(a)d,  but  this  omission  was  clearly  due  to  the  carelessness 
of  the  scribe.  It  is,  therefore,  not  necessary  to  regard  -(a)d  as  a 
separate  ending. 

This  form  in  -(«)$  is  used  with  any  subject  in  the  plural,  whether 
noun,  personal  or  relative  pronoun,  or  pronominal  adjective : 
monige  eac  wise  lareowas  winnaft  mid  hira  $eawum,  Cura  Pastor- 
alls,  29,  21 ;  ge/eo$,  3  JiydaK,  89,  14;  «a  «e  willed  to  fela  idles 
•j  unnyttes  gesprecan,  17,  4;  fteahhwse^re  monige  wilniaft  fol- 
goSes,  47,  23. 

It  may  also  be  used  if  the  subject  follows  the  verb  :  ac  sona  bioft 
ftses  modes  eagan  eft  gewende,  56, 12 ;  habbafi  ge,  95, 11  ;  weahsaft 
ge,  109,  5. 

The  same  form  is  used  when  the  verb  is  separated  from  its 
subject :  iSonne  hi  $one  godcundan  wisdom  liorniaft,  30,  4. 

In  addition  to  the  ending  -(a)$,  there  is  a  form  in  -e  used  in  the 
first  and  second  persons  of  the  present  indicative  plural,  but  with 
a  very  limited  range.  It  is  never  used  when  the  subject  precedes 
or  is  separated  from  its  verb.  It  may  be  used  if  the  subject 
follows  the  verb,  but  only  on  the  condition  that  it  be  a  personal 
pronoun  and  be  placed  immediately  after  the  verb  :  $onne  hcebbe 
we,  45,  12.  But  if  the  subject  that  follows  the  verb  is  a  noun  or 
a  pronominal  adjective,  the  ending  must  be  -(«)$.  From  this  rule 
there  are  no  exceptions  in  the  Cura  Pastoralis. 

We  have,  then,  in  Early  West-Saxon  two  endings  for  the  present 
indicative  plural,  -(a)S  and  -e,  the  former  being  used  with  the 
greatest  possible  freedom,  the  latter  within  a  sharply  defined  and 
limited  range.  But,  as  has  been  shown,  the  uses  of  the  two  are 
not  mutually  exclusive.  The  scope  of  the  -(a)$-forms  is  so  wide  as 
to  include  that  of  the  forms  in  -e  ;  or,  more  accurately  stated,  the 
6 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     7 

e-form  had  already  begun  in  the  time  of  Alfred  to  encroach  on  the 
territory  of  the  -(a)^-form  without  being  able,  however,  to  drive  it 
from  the  field. 

This  -e  was  not  originally  an  ending  of  the  plural  indicative 
but  is  a  curtailment  of  the  -en  of  the  plural  subjunctive.  Since 
the  imperative  proper  had  only  one  form  in  the  plural,  namely  the 
second  person,  the  first  and  third  persons  were  supplied  from  the 
subjunctive.  There  is  a  trace  of  an  old  adhortative  first  plural  in 
-an  in  the  imperative  but  this  soon  gave  way  to  the  corresponding 
subjunctive,  or  optative,  form  in  -en.  The  adhortative  optative, 
when  intensified  by  stress,  easily  acquired  a  jussive  sense.  This 
led  to  an  extension  of  the  optative  forms  to  the  second  person 
of  the  imperative,  that  is,  to  the  imperative  proper.  The  exten- 
sion of  subjunctive  forms  to  the  indicative  was  aided  by  willan, 
itself  originally  an  optative,  the  meaning l  of  which  made  it  par- 
ticularly adapted  to  mediate  between  the  two  moods.  The  use 
of  curtailed  endings  in  the  indicative  was  also  facilitated  by  the 
preteritive  presents,  in  which  the  plural  inflection  -on  lent  itself 
readily  to  leveling  with  the  optative  or  to  curtailment. 

The  encroachment  of  the  optative  on  the  imperative  is  con- 
sidered in  the  following  monographs. 

M.  Braunschweiger,  Die  Flexion  des  Verbums  in  ^Elfric's  Gram- 
matik  (Marburg,  1890,  p.  10). 

C.  Briihl,  Die  Flexion  des  Verbums  in  ^Elfric's  Heptateuch  und 
Buch  Hiob  (Marburg,  1892,  p.  11). 

W.  Fleischhauer,  Ueber  den  Gebrauch  des  Conjunctivs  in  Alfred's 
altengl.  Uebersetzung  von  Gregorys  Cura  Pastoralis  (Gottingen,  1889, 
pp.  4-5). 

O.  Hennicke,  Der  Konjunktiv  im  Altenglischen  (Gottingen,  1878, 
pp.  11-12). 

A.  N.  Henshaw,  The  Syntax  of  the  Indicative  and  Subjunctive  Moods 
in  the  Anglo-Saxon  Gospels  (Leipzig-Reudnitz,  1894,  pp.  9-10). 

1  In  this  connection  note  the  extension  of  an  optative  inflection  to  the  second 
singular  of  the  preterit  indicative  in  all  the  West-Germanic  dialects  (cf.  Kluge, 
Vorgeschichte  der  altgerm.  Dialekte*  |  199).  The  use  of  a  diplomatic  subjunctive 
as  an  indicative  may  also  account  for  ihr  sdd  in  Modern  German,  and  may  prove 
a  better  explanation  of  durfen,  konnen,  m'ogen,  miissen,  etc.,  than  the  theory  of  O. 
Brenner  (Beitr.,  XX,  84),  who  holds  that  the  umlaut  arose  from  postpositive  wir, 
ir,  and  sie.  Note  also  mich  (mir)  deucht,  which  was  originally  a  subjunctive. 


8      Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

G.  Hotz,  On  the  Use  of  the  Subjunctive  Mood  in  Anglo-Saxon  and 
its  further  History  in  Old  English  (Zurich,  1882,  pp.  13-16). 

P.  T.  Kiihn,  Die  Syntax  des  Verbums  in  JElfrics  Heiligenleben 
(Leipzig-Reudnitz,  1889,  p.  9). 

M.  Prollius,  Ueber  den  syntactisehen  Gebrauch  des  Conjunctivs  in 
•den  Cynewulfsehen  Dichtungen,  Elene,  Juliana,  und  Crist  (Marburg, 
1888,  p.  5). 

W.  Wandschneider,  Zur  Syntax  des  Verbs  in  Lang  leys  Vision  of 
William  concerning  Piers  the  Plowman  (Leipzig,  1887,  pp.  44-45  and 
p.  58). 

T.  Wohlfahrt,  Die  Syntax  des  Verbums  in  jElfric's  Uebersetzung  des 
Heptateuch  und  des  Buches  Hiob  (Munchen,  1886,  pp.  2-3). 

Although  both  the  forms  -e  and  -en  occur  in  the  optative  plural, 
it  is  noteworthy  that  only  the  former  occurs  in  the  present  indica- 
tive plural  in  the  Cura  Pastoralis.  The  e-form  is  given  for  the 
indicative  by  both  manuscripts  throughout,  whereas  they  differ 
eight  times  in  their  use  of  the  subjunctive  -e  and  -en.  Of  these, 
five  are  negative  :  neforbinde  ge  (Cotton),  neforbinden  ge  (Hatton), 
105,  7 ;  ne  brede  ge  (C),  ne  bregden  \jge~]  (H),  173,  10  ;  ne  gremige 
ge  (C),  ne  gremigen  ge  (H),  189,  23;  ne  gewunige  ge  (C),  ne 
gew[u]nigen  ge  (H),  317,  18  ;  and  ne  forlceten  (C),  ne  forlcete  (H), 
136, 12.  The  other  variants  are  :  gearigen  (C),  gearige  (H),  119,  5 ; 
mcegen  (C),  mcege  (H),  119,  5 ;  and  hcebben  (C),  hcebbe  (H),  323,  1. 

In  addition  to  these,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  manuscripts 
differ  twice  in  their  use  of  the  endings  of  the  preterit  plural : 
gebrohte  (C),  gebrohten  (H),  191,  8  ;  and  ftonne  ceton  ge  (C),  ftonne 
cete  ge  (H),  317,  2. 

Since  the  two  manuscripts  published  by  Sweet  were  written 
in  the  reign  of  Alfred,1  one  would  infer  from  these  different  forms, 
varying  often  in  the  same  manuscript, a  that  the  older  ending  -en 
in  ne  binden  ive,  occurring  between  two  more  strongly  accented 

1  See  Sweet's  Introduction,  p.  xvii. 

2  Wiilfing  (Die  Syntax  in  den  Werken  Alfreds  des  Grossen,  Bonn,  1894,  I,  341) 
says :  '  Ich  glaube,  dass  diese  Verschiedenheiten  nur  auf  der  Willkiir  der  Schreiber 
beruhen.'     But  this  is  not  a  sufficient  reason.    What  was  the  cause  of  this  caprice 
of  the  scribes?  The  fact  that  similar  vagaries  do  not  reveal  themselves  in  the 
dropping  of  other  inflections,  as  for  instance  -s  or  -$,  argues  for  the  existence  of 
a  cause  other  than  '  die  Willkiir  der  Schreiber '  for  the  dropping  or  the  retention 
of  this  final  -n. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.       9 

syllables,1  had  already  become  -e,  ne  binde  we,  in  actual  pronun- 
ciation. 

From  both  manuscripts  it  is  seen  that  the  curtailed  forms  not 
only  predominate  in  adhortative-optative  constructions,  but  are  also 
carried  over  into  the  indicative  in  not  fewer  than  seventeen 
instances :  Hwset  cwefte  we  ftonne,  175,  5 ;  Hwset  do  ge,  broftor, 
do$  esnlice,  363,  2 ;  We  brucaft  ures  segnes,  ne  gitsige  we  nanes 
o$res  monnes,  337,  19.  Of  these  seventeen  cases,  only  three 
express  negation. 

We  see,  moreover,  from  both  manuscripts  that  the  force  of 
analogy  had  caused  the  -e  to  be  extended  to  the  preteritive  presents 
in  -on  (including  woldon)  in  six  cases  :  hu  durre  we,  63,  6  ;  hu  feor 
wolde  ge,  331,  1.  It  was  also  analogically  carried  over  to  the  -on 
of  the  preterit  indicative  in  six  cases  :  nefceste  ge,  317,  1. 

In  the  late  West-Saxon  of  .ZElfric  and  in  the  ElicMing  Homilies 
the  inflection  of  the  indicative  plural  present  is  the  same  as  in  that 
of  Alfred.  There  is  still  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  jussive 
subjunctive  to  supplant  the  imperative  plural  in  -a%. 2 

During  the  transition  period  from  late  West-Saxon  to  Middle 
English,  -a$  became  first  -ce$  and  then  -eiS  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
twelfth  century.  E.  Vogel  (Zur  Flexion  des  englischen  Verbums  im 
XL  und  XII.  Jahrhundert,  Berlin,  1902,  p.  25)  gives  -a&  with 
occasional  -e3  as  the  ending  of  the  plural  indicative  in  MS.  H 
[Bodleian  NE.  F.  IV.  12]  of  Wulfstan's  homilies.  According  to 

*A  similar  process  occurs  in  Old  Norse.  The  final  -m  of  the  first  person 
plural  is  very  often  dropped  when  the  verb  is  immediately  followed  by  the 
pronouns  vit  (mil}  or  ver  (mer)  ;  thus,  Undo  ver,  we  bind,  for  bindom  ver. 

Also  in  the  second  person  plural,  the  final  -"$  of  the  ending  -ffi,  -eft  falls  regu- 
larly when  the  pronouns  pit,  per  immediately  follow :  gefe  per,  you  give,  for  gefeft 
per.  In  this  manner  the  pronouns  pit  and  per  were  developed  from  the  older 
forms  it  and  er  (cf.  Noreen,  Altnordische  Grammatik,  I,  §  458  and  $  394,  note  5). 

The  same  process  is  seen  in  Middle  High  German.  The  -en  of  the  first  person 
plural  indicative  is  reduced  to  -e  in  gebe  wir,  lese  wir.  After  a  long  syllable  the 
whole  ending  was  frequently  dropped.  Already  in  Hartmann  von  Aue  such 
forms  as  grif  wir,  ver  swig  wir  are  found  (cf.  Weinhold,  Mittelhochdeutsche  Gram- 
matik, Paderborn,  1883,  \  369;  Paul,  Mittelhochdeutsche  Grammatik,  Halle,  1894, 
\  155,  note  2). 

*  C.  Briihl,  Die  Flexion  des  Verbums  in  ^Elfrics  Heptateuch  und  Buch  Hiob  (Mar- 
burg, 1892,  p.  11) ;  G.  Schwerdtfeger,  Das  schwache  Verbum  in  jElfrics  Homilien 
(Marburg,  1893,  p.  9). 


10     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

Napier  (fiber  die  Werke  des  altenglischen  Erzbischofs  Wulfstan, 
Weimar,  1882,  p.  10),  this  manuscript  dates  from  the  middle  of 
the  twelfth  century.  Other  transitional  texts  illustrate  the  gradual 
weakening  of  the  vowel  in  the  inflectional  syllable.  B.  Buchholz 
(Die  Fragments  der  Reden  der  Seele  an  den  Ldchnam,  Erlanger 
Beitrdge  zur  englischen  Philologie,  vi,  p.  xxix  and  p.  Ixii)  shows 
that  -eft  is  the  regular  ending  of  the  present  indicative  plural  in  the 
Worcester  and  the  Oxford  MSS.,  also  of  the  twelfth  century.  In 
only  one  instance  does  -aft  occur. 

In  the  first  person  plural  of  the  adhortative  optative,  according 
to  Vogel,  there  occurs  in  Wulfstan's  homilies  no  curtailment  of  the 
ending  before  we,  whereas  in  the  first  plural  of  the  indicative  the 
curtailed  form  is  the  usual  one  before  the  postpositive  pronoun » 
No  parallel  to  this  distinction  is  shown  by  the  Ancren  Riwle  in 
which  the  use  of  curtailed  forms  in  pronominal  postposition  i& 
invariable  in  the  adhortative  optative  but  not  in  the  first  plural 
indicative.  The  distinction  made  by  Wulfstan  is  also  observed  in 
the  Blickling  Homilies,  an  earlier  text,  in  which  only  one  curtailed 
form  occurs  in  the  adhortative  optative. *  In  the  two  last-mentioned 
texts  the  old  optatival  ending  -en  has  been  replaced  by  -an,  which 
is  explained  by  Sievers  as  a  borrowing  of  the  ending  of  the  preterit 
optative  which  had  previously  been  leveled  with  the  preterit 
indicative.2  Vogel,  however,  with  much  more  improbability, 
prefers  to  see  in  the  use  of  this  form  the  influence  of  the  second 
weak  conjugation  in  which  the  vowel  of  the  present  indicative 
plural  had  been  extended  to  the  optative  plural. 

In  all  three  of  these  texts,  both  the  full  form  in  -p  and  the 
curtailed  form  are  used  in  the  indicative  when  the  pronoun  is 
postpositive.  Wulfstan  shows  a  much  larger  percentage  of  cur- 
tailed forms  than  do  the  Blickling  Homilies  and  the  Ancren  Riwle. 
In  the  second  plural  imperative  Wulfstan  and  the  Homilies  may 
have  the  full  ^-form  before  the  postpositive  pronoun,  although  the 
number  of  such  forms  in  Wulfstan  is  very  small.  In  the  Ancren 
Riwle,  on  the  contrary,  the  curtailed  form  is  used  throughout.  This 
text  even  goes  so  far  as  to  use  the  curtailed  ending  in  the  impera- 

1  A.  K.  Hardy,  Die  Sprache  der  Blickling  Homilien  (Leipzig,  1899,  p.  77). 
8  Angelsdchsische  Grammatik,  %  361,  note  1  and  §  365. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     11 

tive  plural  when  the  subject-pronoun  is  unexpressed.  This  use 
probably  originated  in  the  omission  of  the  pronoun  because  of  the 
contiguity  of  a  following  ge:  as,  loke  pet  ge  habben,  418.  The 
next  step  was  the  omission  of  the  second  pronominal  subject  in 
the  case  of  two  verbs  in  the  same  grammatical  relation,  especially 
if  the  second  had  a  pronominal  object  to  aid  in  determining  the 
form  of  the  verb  :  ne  here  ge  non  iren  .  .  .  nene  beate  ou  per  mide, 
418.  Finally,  and  this  important  question  will  be  dealt  with 
more  fully  later,  the  curtailed  form  without  a  postpositive  pronoun 
became  used  independently  :  ne  makie  none  purses  .  .  .  auh  schep- 
ie&  ;  ne  gelde  neuer  uvel  uor  god,  186.  This  form  bore  a  close 
resemblance  to  the  imperative  singular  and  in  later  times,  when 
final  -e  came  to  lose  its  syllabic  value,  this  use  was  responsible  for 
the  apparent  interchange  of  the  singular  and  plural  imperative  in 
the  same  discourse. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  although  the  curtailed  form  is  common 
before  we  and  ge,  it  does  not  occur  before  heo.  This  lack  of 
power  on  the  part  of  the  curtailed  ending  to  extend  itself  to  other 
persons  in  the  South  is  in  marked  contrast  to  the  Northern  usage  in 
extending  the  vocalic  forms  to l  all  cases  of  pronominal  postposition ' * 
and  even  to  cases  where  the  pronoun  is  prepositive. 

In  the  A-text  of  Layamon's  Brut 2  about  1200,  The  Owl  and 
Nightingale3  about  1220,  Robert  of  Gloucester's  Chronicle4  about 
1300,  and  the  Gloucestershire  legends5  of  the  same  period,  the 
unconditioned  indicative  and  imperative  plural  have  the  ^-ending. 
With  a  postpositive  pronoun,  the  curtailed  ending  is  frequently, 
but  not  invariably,  used.  In  the  legends  of  St.  Editha  and  St. 
Ethelreda  written  in  Wiltshire  in  1420,  -eth  appears  in  the  indica- 

1  This  phrase  of  Sweet's  [see  p.  4  above]  in  the  introduction  to  the  Cura 
Pastoralis  is  inapplicable  to  the  South  since  curtailment  here  is  restricted  to  the 
first  and  second  persons. 

2  B.  Callenberg,  '  Layamon  und  Orm  nach  ihren  Flexionsverhaltnissen  vergli- 
chen'  (Herrig's  Jrc^myLVii,  317  ff.). 

3  H.  Noelle,  Die  Sprache  des  altenglischen  Gedichts  von  der  Eule  und  Nachtigall 
(Gottingen,  1870,  p.  47). 

4  F.  Pabst, '  Flexionsverhaltnisse  bei  Kobert  von  Gloucester'  (Anglia,  xm,  202). 
6  F.  Mohr,  Sprachliche  Untersuchungen  zu  den  miltelengl.  Legenden  aus  Glouces- 
tershire (Bonn,  1888,  p.  65). 


12     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural 

tive  plural  beside  the  more  frequent  -en.1  The  later  use  of  -eth 
in  the  indicative  and  the  imperative  can  be  more  advantageously 
considered  in  connection  with  the  Midland  dialect. 

The  inflection  of  the  present  indicative  plural  in  the  Kentish  is 
from  the  earliest  times  the  same  as  that  of  the  West-Saxon,  in 
contrast  with  the  phonology  of  the  Kentish  which  corresponds 
more  closely  with  that  of  the  Mercian.  The  unconditioned  indica- 
tive and  imperative  plural  have  the  inflection  -eft  in  the  Kentish 
Gospels2  of  the  twelfth  century,  the  Sermons5  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  and  the  Ayenbite  of  Inwyt*  and  the  poems  of  William 
of  Shoreham 5  of  the  fourteenth  century.  When  the  pronoun  is 
postpositive,  the  curtailed  ending  may  be  used  before  we  and  ge  in 
both  the  indicative  and  the  imperative. 


1  W.  Heuser,  Die  mittelengl  Legenden  von  St.  Editha  und  St.  Ethelreda  (Gottin- 
gen,  1887,  p.  38). 

*M.  Reimann,  Die  Sprache  der  mittelkentischen  Evangelien  (Berlin,  1888,  p.  52). 

3  O.  Danker,  Die  Laut-  und  Flexionslehre  der  mittelkentischen  Denkmaler  (Strass- 
burg,  1879,  p.  42). 

4  Danker,  p.  42 ;  M.  Konrath,  c  Zur  Laut-  und  Flexionslehre  des  Mittelken- 
tischen' (Herrig's  Archiv,  LXXXVIII,  164-167). 

5  Danker,  p.  42;  Konrath,  pp.  164-167). 


B.-THE  INFLECTION  OP  THE  PRESENT  PLURAL 
INDICATIVE  IN  THE  MIDLAND. 


Turning  now  to  the  Early  Mercian,  we  find  in  the  Vespasian 
Psalter l  one  form  -(a)$  for  the  present  indicative  plural.  This 
form  is  used  with  any  subject,  whether  noun,  personal  or  relative 
pronoun,  or  pronominal  adjective  :  alle  fteofte  fteowiaft  him,  72, 11  ; 
ge  slepaft,  67,  4 ;  alle  %a  gehyhtaft,  5,  12  ;  monge  arisaft,  3,  2.  It 
is  also  used  if  the  subject  follows  the  verb :  ne  ftorhwuniaft  ¥>a 
unrehtwisan,  5,  6 ;  lufiaft  ge,  4,  3 ;  onfoft  ge,  67,  17 ;  ondredaft 
alle,  65,  9. 

But  in  cases  of  pronominal  postposition,  there  is  in  the  Vespasian 
Psalter  no  choice  of  forms  for  the  present  indicative  plural  such  as 
the  Early  West-Saxon  presents.  The  ending  -(«)<$  is  used  whether 
the  personal  pronoun  precedes  or  follows,  and  whether  the  sentence 
expresses  negation  or  not. 

The  same  regularity  is  found  in  the  use  of  -en  for  the  present 
optative  plural.  Throughout  the  Psalter  there  are  only  two 
instances  of  the  reduction  of  -en  to  -e,  both  of  which  are  in  the  same 
adhortative  construction :  wynsumie  we,  94,  1  and  94,  2. 

The  other  chief  text  for  the  Early  Mercian,  The  Rushworth  Gloss 
to  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew, 2  is  not  so  conservative  in  its  use  of 
forms  in  the  present  indicative  plural  as  is  the  Vespasian  Psalter. 
It  is  true  the  p-forms  are  used,  with  only  a  few  exceptions  in  -n,  3 
but  the  connecting  vowel  varies  from  a  to  e  (-op,  -cep,  -ep), 4  a 
phenomenon  that  is  characteristic  of  the  Old  Northern  texts. 
These  forms  in  -p  are  used  with  any  subject  in  the  plural,  regard- 

1  E.  Zeuner,  Die  Sprache  des  kentischen  Psalters,  Vespasian  A.  1  (Halle,  1881, 
p.  96). 

2  E.  M.  Brown,  The  Language  of  the  Rushworth  Gloss  to  the  Gospel  of  Matthew 
and  the  Mercian  Dialect  (Gottingen,  1892,  n,  40). 

3  Commenting  on  the  occurrence  of  the  n-forms,  Brown  says :  '  These  seem  to 
be  early  examples  of  the  "extension"  of  -en  to  the  present  indicative  plural,, 
which  afterwards  became  "  the  characteristic  feature  of  the  Midland  verb." ' 

4  The  form  -ip  also  occurs  in  the  plural :  "Sa  "Se  hie  hyngrip,  v,  6. 

13 


14     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

less  of  its  position :  we  habbap,  m,  8 ;  $a  %e  eow  lufigap,  v,  46 ; 
ne  gap  ge,  v,  20 ;  lifgap  menu,  IV,  4;  geforletep,  vi,  14. 

A  chief  point  of  difference  between  Rf  and  the  Vespasian  Psalter 
is  the  use  of  the  curtailed  form  in  the  indicative.  According  to 
Sievers,1  there  is  one  instance  of  this  kind  in  Rr :  sitte  git,  xx,  23. 
But  it  is  probable  that  ftonne  ge  bidde  eow,  vi,  5,  corresponding  to 
mi$  %y  gie  gebiddas  of  the  Lindisfarne  Matthew  and  to  cum  oratis 
of  the  Latin  text,  represents  a  curtailed  form  in  the  indicative,  the 
ending  having  been  influenced  by  the  following  pronoun  eow. 
Compare  also  in  the  same  context  %us  ge  ftonne  eow  gebiddap,  vi,  9, 
where  the  form  is  certainly  indicative. 

In  the  loss  of  -n  in  the  present  optative  plural,  Rf  resembles  the 
Cura  Pastoralis  and  stands  in  sharp  contrast  with  the  Vespasian 
Psalter.  Rf  uses  the  form  in  -e  twenty-three  times,  whereas  in  the 
Psalter  the  -n  is  dropped  only  twice. 

But  a  marked  disagreement  with  the  Cura  Pastoralis  is  the 
constant  use 2  of  the  regular  imperative  form  in  -p,  instead  of  the 
optatival  -e(n),  in  negative  constructions  :  ne  dop  ge,  xxni,  3 ;  ne 
wenap  ge,  V,  17  ;  ne  beopge,  VI,  16  ;  ne  sellap  ge,  VII,  6  ;  ne  dcemep 
gey  vii,  1.  As  has  been  shown,  the  Cura  Pastoralis  has  the  cur- 
tailed form  not  only  in  negative  clauses  :  ne  wene  ge,  353,  21 ;  ne 
beo  ge,  325,  8 ;  but  also  in  imperatives  without  negation  :  beo  ge, 
189,  22;  gebindege,  345,  17. 

This  refusal  on  the  part  of  R'  to  use  the  curtailed  ending  in  the 
imperative  plural  should  be  brought  into  connection  with  the 
invariable  use  of  -(&)$  in  the  second  plural  imperative  in  the  Psal- 
ter.3 In  view  of  the  tendency  in  the  Midland  to  generalize  the 
ending  -en,  this  preservation  of  the  old  imperative  plural  in  -p  is 
all  the  more  striking.  This  is,  in  reality,  the  beginning  of  the 
obdurate  resistance  made  by  the  form  in  -eth  to  the  encroachment 
of  that  in  -en.  The  ^?-plural  here  intrenches  itself  in  the  impera- 
tive, not  to  be  driven  out  until  the  loss  of  inflectional  -n  had 
leveled  the  plural  of  the  optative  and  the  indicative  with  the 
imperative  singular. 

1  Angelsdcksische  Grammatik*  §  360,  note  5. 

2  Brown  (p.  45)  gives  three  curtailed  forms  against  one  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  in  -p. 

3  Zeuner,  p.  97. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     15 


A  marked  contrast  is  presented  by  the  Midland  to  the  conserva- 
tism of  the  South  in  preserving  the  ^-forms  in  the  indicative 
plural  present.  In  the  Midland  of  the  late  Old  English  period, 
-p  had  gradually  retreated  before  -n  until  the  latter  became  the 
normal  sign  of  the  plural  indicative.  As  early  as  the  third  part 
of  the  Peterborough  Chronicle1  (A.  D.  1132-1154),  the  form  in  -p 
had  become  extremely  rare.  In  Orrm2  it  is  relegated  to  impera- 
tives when  the  subject-pronoun  precedes  the  verb  or  is  unexpressed, 
and  -e(n)  is  also  the  regular  inflection  of  the  indicative  in  the  Debate 
of  the  Body  and  the  Soul*  dating  from  the  second  half  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  the  Lay  of  Havelock*  about  1300,  Robert 
Manny  ng  of  Brunne5  about  1330,  and  the  language  of  the  Nor- 
folk Guilds6  of  1389. 

In  the  extreme  southeast,  Kentish  influence  on  the  Essex  homilies 
of  the  thirteenth  century  caused  -eft  to  vary  with  -en  ;  7  but  in  the 
Story  of  Genesis  and  Exodus  of  the  early  thirteenth  century  only 
-en  is  used  in  the  plural  indicative.8 

The  form  in  -en  which  appears  first  in  the  Northeast  Midland 
soon  became  the  characteristic  inflection  of  the  whole  Mercian 
territory.  In  the  West-Midland  Prose  Psalter  of  the  earlier  part 
of  the  fourteenth  century,9  the  ^-plurals  are  restricted  almost 
exclusively  to  imperatives.  A  study  of  the  inflection  of  the  present 

1  H.  Meyer,  Zur  Sprache  der  jungeren  Teile  der  Chronik  von  Peterborough  (Jena, 
1889,  p.  80). 

8  R.  Sachse,  Das  unorganische  E  im  Orrm  zugleich  eine  Untersuehung  uber  die 
Fiexionsweise  Orrms  (Halle,  1881,  p.  49). 

8  G.  Heesch,  Uber  Sprache  und  Versbau  des  halbsdchs.  Gedichts,  Debate  of  the 
Body  and  the  Soul  (Kiel  diss.,  1884,  p.  65). 

*  P.  Wohlfeil,  The  Lay  of  Havelok  the  Dane.  Ein  Beitrag  ZUT  mitteleng.  Sprach- 
und  Litteraturgeschichte  (Leipzig,  1890,  pp.  56-57)  ;  F.  Schmidt,  Zmr  Heimatbestim- 
mung  des  Havelok  (Gottingen,  1900,  p.  76). 

6  A.  W.  Zetsche,  Uber  den  I.  Teil  der  Bearbeitung  des  Roman  de  Brut  des  Wace 
durch  Robert  Mannyng  of  Brunne  (Keudnitz-Leipzig,  1887,  p.  47). 

6  E.  Schultz,  Die  Sprache  der  englischen  Gilds  aus  dem  Jahre  1389  (Hildesheim, 
1891,  p.  37). 

7  A.  Kriiger,  Sprache  und  Dialekt  der  mittelengl.  Homilien  in  der  Handschrift  B. 
14.  52,  Trinity  Coll.,  Cambridge  (Erlangen,  1885,  p.  39). 

8  Hilmer,  Ueber  die  Sprache  der  altengl.  Story  of  Genesis  and  Exodus  (Sonders- 
hausen  program,  1876,  p.  30). 

9  Bulbring,  The  Earliest  Complete  English  Prose  Psalter,  E.  E.  T.  8.,  97,  p.  vi. 


16     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

indicative  and  the  imperative  in  the  first  thirty-five  Psalms  has 
yielded  the  following  results. 

The  plural  in  -(e)n  is  invariably  used  in  the  indicative  when  the 
subject  is  a  noun,  an  adjective,  or  a  relative  pronoun  :  princes 
acorden,  II,  2 ;  mani  arisen,  in,  1 ;  hij  pat  afien,  II,  13.  Not 
including  the  substantive  verb  ben  which  is  used  alike  as  the  plural 
of  the  indicative  and  of  the  subjunctive,  there  are  thirty-eight 
plural  indicatives  with  a  relative  pronoun-subject.  These  have 
without  exception  the  ending  -(e)n.  The  distance  of  the  verb  from 
its  subject  does  not  affect  its  inflection  :  pe  welles  of  wickedness  hany 
xvn,  5.  Two  nouns  in  the  singular  used  conjointly  as  subject 
may  require  the  -n  form  :  my  fader  and  my  moder  han,  xxvi,  16. 

With  a  personal  pronoun-subject,  the  inflection  is  usually  -e :  ge 
saie  (dicitis),  IV,  5  ;  we  have,  xix,  10 ;  loue  ge,  iv,  3 ;  hou  saie  ge, 
x,  1.  The  ending  -en,  however,  is  used  once  :  in  wich  hij  penchen, 
IX,  23,  where  the  Dublin  MS.  has  pat  pey  thenche  in.  There  are 
only  two  instances  of  -ep  in  the  indicative  plural :  whi  doutep  hij, 
n,  1,  for  which  the  Dublin  MS.  has  doutyd,  the  Vulgate  original 
being  fremuerunt ;  and  whereto  loue  ge  ydelnes  and  sechep  lesyng  f 

IV,  3. 

As  a  rule  the  modals,  including  willan,  are  uninflected  in  the 
plural.  An  exception  is  seen  in  xxxiv,  31  where  hij  pat  wyl  and 
hij  pat  willen  occur  in  the  same  verse. 

The  optative  plural  usually  assumes  the  inflection  -en :  fallen  hij, 

V,  12 ;  ne  gladen  hij,  xxxiy,  22,  but  the  -n  is  sometimes  curtailed, 
as  breJce  we,  u,  3 ;  pat  hij  ne  speke,  xxxni,  13.     In  rare  instances 
the  full  inflection  -en  has  been  dropped  :  cast  we,  n,  3  ;   Wax  alle 
myn  enemy s  asshamed,  vi,  10. 

The  imperative  plural  has  the  ending  -ep  both  when  uncon- 
ditioned :  under stondep,  n,  10 ;  Louep,  xxx,  30,  and  when  the 
subject  pronoun  stands  in  direct  contact  with  the  verb :  heriep  ge, 
xxn,  23 ;  bep  ge,  xxm,  7  :  wittep  ge  nougt  (uolite),  xxxi,  1 1 . 
There  is  one  plural  in  -es,  wrappes,  iv,  5,  and  one  in  -e,  take,  11, 12. 

In  the  later  Middle  English  period  the  dominant  inflections  of 
the  unconditioned  indicative  and  imperative  plural  are  -e(n)  and 
-eth  respectively.  In  the  Southern  part  of  the  Midland  -eth  is  also 
frequently  found  in  the  indicative.  The  ending  -es,  which  varies 
strongly  with  -en  in  the  Northwest,  occurs  also  more  frequently 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     17 

than  -eth  in  the  imperative  plural  of  Havelock.1  It  is  often  used 
in  both  the  indicative  and  the  imperative  plural  by  Robert  of 
Brunne,  in  whose  works,  as  well  as  in  Havelock,  uninflected  forms 
occasionally  occur  in  the  indicative. 

During  this  later  period  there  is  scarcely  a  Midland  text  that 
shows  the  unvaried  use  of  -e(n)  in  the  indicative  plural.  Ten  Brink 
records  Chaucer's  use  of  ^-plurals  only  in  the  case  of  haveth  and 
perhaps  gooth?  but  the  study  of  Kittredge  shows  that  plurals  in 
-th  occur  in  the  four  chief  manuscripts  of  the  Troilusf — Campsall, 
Harleian  2280,  Cambridge  Gg.  4.  27,  and  Harleian  3943.  Plurals 
in  -es  occur  in  only  the  first  two  of  these  and  may  be  confidently 
attributed  to  the  scribes.  Manly 's  study  of  the  Legend  of  Good 
Women  f  based  on  MS.  Cambridge  Gg.  4.  27,  gives  plurals  in  -th 
but  none  in  -es.  Likewise  H.  C.  Ford  finds  in  the  House  of  Fame 5 
three  or  possibly  four  occurrences  of  the  £/i-plural  but  none  of  -es. 

In  Piers  the  Plowman,  according  to  E.  Bernard, 6  -e$  and  -en 
are  used  '  indiscriminately '  in  the  indicative  plural.  Wyclif 7  uses 
-(e)n  with  occasional  -th.  In  the  London  archives  and  the 
state  and  parliament  papers  of  the  later  fourteenth  and  the  earlier 
fifteenth  century,  the  regular  inflection  is  -e(n)  with  occasional  -th.8 
In  the  fifteenth  century  -eth  occurs  beside  the  more  frequent  -e(n) 

1  Wohlfeil  (p.  57)  denies  that  -es  occurs  in  the  plural  indicative  in  Havelock. 

2  The  Language  and  Metre  of  Chaucer. — Second  edition,  revised  by  F.  Kluge 
and  translated  by  M.  B.  Smith  (London,  1901,  §  187  and  §  197).     In  both  the 
first  and  the  second  edition  of  Ten  Brink's  grammar  and  also  in  the  English 
translation,  goon  is  given  as  the  plural  of  the  present  indicative  and  gooth  as  that 
of  the  present  subjunctive.     This,  of  course,  is  a  mistake. 

3 ' Observations  on  the  Language  of  Chaucer's  Troilus'  (Chaucer  Society's 
Publications,  Second  Ser.,  28,  %%  97  and  124). 

4 '  Observations  on  the  Language  of  the  Legend  of  Good  Women '  ( Harvard 
Studies  and  Notes  in  Philology  and  Literature,  n,  §|  97  and  98). 

5  Observations  on  the  Language  of  Chaucer's  House  of  Fame  (Roanoke,  1899,  g§ 
97  and  98). 

6  William  Langland:  A  grammatical  Treatise  (Bonn,  1874,  p.  77);  also  E.  Kron, 
William  Langley's  Such  von  Peter  dem  Pfiluger  (Erlangen,  1885,  p.  59). 

7  H.  Fischer,  Ueber  die  Sprache  John  Wyclif 's, — Laut-  und  Flexionslehre  (Halle, 
1880,  p.   61);    E.  Gasner,  Beitrage  zum  Enlwickelungsgang  der  neuengl.  Schrift- 
sprache  auf  Grund  der  mittelengl.  jBibelversionen  me  sie  auf   Wyclif  und  Purvey 
zurilckgehen  sollen  (Niirnberg,  1891,  p.  27). 

8Morsbach,  Ueber  den  Ursprung  der,  neuengl.  Schriftsprache  (Heilbronn,  1888, 
p.  134  and  pp.  136  -137). 


18     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

in  Palladius,1  in  Pecock,2  and  in  the  Coventry  Plays  and  archives.3 
In  Caxton  the  predominant  inflection  is  -e(n),  but  -eth  also  occurs.4 
He  reveals  a  tendency  to  use  -e  with  a  pronominal,  but  -en  with  a 
substantival  subject — a  tendency  that  finds  a  parallel  not  only  in 
the  use  of  the  Northern  -e  and  -es,  as  Rdmstedt  suggests,5  but  also 
in  the  use  of  -e  and  -en  in  the  West-Midland  Prose  Psalter  men- 
tioned above. 

In  the  sixteenth  century,6  ^-endings  are  still  frequent  in  the 
Midland,  and  occur  in  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  in 
the  language  of  Shakespeare  7  and  his  contemporaries.8 

The  Midland  inflection  -en  of  the  present  indicative  plural  is  due 
to  a  transference  to  the  indicative  of  a  form  that  originally  belonged 
to  the  optative.9  We  have  seen  that  in  classic  West-Saxon  this 
borrowed  optative  form  was  restricted  in  the  indicative  to  verbs 
with  a  postpositive  pronoun  of  the  first  or  second  persons,  in 
which  case  the  ending  -en  was  curtailed  to  -e.  We  shall  see  in 
the  next  chapter  that  this  curtailed  form  was  used  in  Early 

1  C.  Struever,  Die  mittelengl.  Uebersetzung  des  Palladius  (Halle,  1887,  p.  81). 

2  A.  Hoffmann,  Laut-  und  Formenlehre  in  Reginald  Pecock's  Represser  (Greifs- 
wald,  1900,  p.  61). 

3  M.  Kramer,  Sprache  und  Heimat  der  sogen.  Ludus  Coventrice  (Halle,  1892, 
pp.  54-5). 

4  H.  Komstedt,  Die  englische  Schriftsprache  bei  Caxton  (Gottingen,  1891,  p.  46). 
5K6mstedt  says:  '  Auffallend  an  den  Gebrauch  des  nordlichen  -e  und  -es  erin- 

nert  es,  dass  blosses  -e  beim  Pronomen,  -en  beim  Substantiv  beliebter  scheint.' 

"Matzner,3  I,  361:  Brandl,  'Quellen  des  weltlichen  Dramas  in  England  vor 
Shakespeare'  (Quellen  und  Forschungen,  LXXX,  p.  Izxxii). 

T  Abbott,  A  Shakespearian  Grammar  (London  and  New  York,  1888,  pp.  234- 
237) ;  Franz,  Shakespeare- Orammatik  (Halle,  1900,  p.  3  and  p.  20). 

8  K.  Pollert,  Die  3.  Person  Pluralis  auf  -s  bei  Shakespeare  (Marburg,  1881,  pp. 
58-59) ;  Lounsbury,  History  of  the  English  Language  (New  York,  1894,  p.  414). 

9T.  Miiller,  Angelsdchsische  Grammatik  (Gottingen,  1883,  p.  226);  Sweet,  A 
New  English  Grammar  (Oxford,  1892,  §  1230). 

A  similar  encroachment  of  the  inflection  of  the  optative  plural  on  that  of  the 
indicative  plural  is  found  in  Middle  Low  German.  From  1350  to  1450  -et  and 
-en  are  used  interchangeably  in  the  indicative,  but  in  the  second  half  of  the 
fifteenth  century  the  -en  forms  are  almost  exclusively  used. — H.  Tiimpel,  '  Die 
Mundarten  des  alten  niedersachsischen  Gebietes  zwischen  1300  und  1500  nach 
den  Urkunden  dargestellt'  (Beitrage,  vii,  90). 

At  the  present  day  in  the  dialects  west  of  the  Elbe,  -et  is  the  regular  inflection 
of  the  first  and  third  plural  indicative ;  whereas  in  the  dialects  to  the  east  of  that 
river,  -en  is  used  in  these  persons. — O.  Behaghel,  Paul's  Grundri8st  8  I,  664. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     19 

Northumbrian  not  only  with  postpositive  pronouns  of  all  three 
persons  but  also  in  cases  of  pronominal  pre-position.  The  Mid- 
land does  not  go  to  this  extreme  but  mediates  between  the 
conservatism  of  the  South  and  the  syntactic  freedom  of  inflection 
characteristic  of  the  North.  As  has  been  pointed  out,  the  West- 
Midland  Prose  Psalter,  in  harmony  with  the  Northern  usage, 
adopts  the  curtailed  form  of  the  verb  whether  the  personal 
pronominal  subject  precedes  or  follows.  But  in  Orrm  the  cur- 
tailed form  in  the  present  indicative  is  restricted  to  pronominal 
postposition  :  we  don,  425 ;  gitt  nilenn,  6220,  but  bidde  we,  5356 ; 
follghe  gitt,  6208.  Although  in  the  present  indicative,  the  curtail- 
ment is  further  restricted  to  the  first  and  second  persons  as  in 
West-Saxon,  in  the  preterit,  forms  like  haffde  pegg,  551  may 
occur  beside  haffdenn  pegg,  1066;  gcefe  pegg,  19757  beside  gcefenn 
pegg,  19747.  With  postpositive  we  and  ge  of  the  present  and 
preterit  indicative,  the  adhortative  optative,  and  the  imperative, 
-en  is  not  used :  beo  ge,  3348 ;  wite  ge,  3357 ;  ga  we,  3390 ;  loke 
we,  3392 ;  ne  wisste  ge,  8951 ;  ne  do  ge,  9306 ;  mughe  we,  9323  ; 
mihhte  we,  11479.  Although  the  curtailed  endings  are  usual  with 
a  postpositive  pronoun  in  the  Genesis  and  Exodus, — sule  ge,  2188, 
2303;  hauege,  2315;  have  we,  3314,  3542,— the  full  form  may 
also  be  used,  sulen  ge,  2354 ;  but  this  is  exceptional.  Here  also 
the  curtailed  form  may  be  extended  to  the  third  person,  but  more 
freely  than  in  Orrm :  wulde  he,  3766 ;  pe  .  .  .  sule,  305  (compare 
3770).  However,  in  the  majority  of  third  persons  the  full  form 
occurs:  delen  he,  151;  sulen  he,  1087;  he  witen,  74;  he  hauen,  3555. 
This  varying  usage  in  the  earlier  texts  of  the  Middle  English 
period  indicates  the  progress  of  the  optatival  -e(n)  in  establishing 
itself  in  the  indicative.  The  influence  of  the  postpositive  we  and 
ge  favored  the  form  -e  ;  but  these  were  greatly  in  the  minority 
compared  with  the  prepositive  pronouns  and  the  third-personal 
nouns  and  relatives.  Thus  -en  became  established  as  the  norm, 
with  -e  as  a  possible  variation  under  definite  conditions.  The 
force  of  pronominal  postposition  is  seen  in  the  use  of  the  curtailed 
form  not  only  in  the  indicative  plural  and  the  imperative  but  also 
in  the  preteritive  presents,  the  preterit  indicative,  and,  where 
leveling  with  the  singular  has  not  already  taken  place,  in  the 
present  and  preterit  subjunctive  as  well. 


20     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

In  view  of  this  demonstrable  development  of  the  Midland  -en 
from  its  origin  in  the  adhortative  optative,  it  is  obviously  inac- 
curate to  assert  that  the  -en  was  carried  over  into  the  indicative  in 
order  to  distinguish  between  the  plural  and  the  third  singular, 
both  of  which  would  otherwise  have  ended  in  -eth.1 

As  we  have  seen  above,  already  in  the  Rushwortli  Gloss  to  St. 
Matthew  the  -en  of  the  optative  plural  was  frequently  curtailed  to 
-e.  The  culmination  of  this  process  is  seen  in  the  Orrmulum2 
where  the  optative  plural  is  completely  leveled  with  the  singular, 
as  was  the  case  in  Early  Northumbrian.  But  in  the  third  part  of 
the  Peterborough  Chronicle 3  and  especially  in  The  Story  of  Genesis 
and  Exodus, 4  the  full  form  in  -en  is  frequently  used. 

The  -en  of  the  unconditioned  indicative  plural  present  is  more 
successful  than  that  of  the  optative  in  resisting  the  tendency 
towards  curtailment,  and  in  many  Midland  texts  the  preservation 
of  the  -n  is  the  distinguishing  mark  between  the  two  moods.5 
The  e-form  in  the  indicative  plural  had,  however,  come  down  from 
the  Early  Mercian  by  lineal  descent  in  cases  of  pronominal  post- 
position in  the  first  and  second  persons,  and  was  gradually  strength- 
ened by  the  analogy  of  the  numerous  curtailed  optatives  and  by  the 
tendency  in  the  language  itself  to  drop  final  -n  in  unaccented  sylla- 
bles. This  tendency  was  very  active  in  the  time  of  Chaucer,6  and 
continued  to  operate  through  the  whole  later  Middle  English  period.7 

Important  testimony  on  the  date  of  the  passing  of  -en  is  fur- 
nished by  Ben  Jonson,  who  asserts  that  the  present  indicative 
plural  in  -en  was  used  until  about  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII 
(1509-1547),  and  complains  that  the  form  of  the  plural  had  in  his 
own  day  become  identical  with  that  of  the  first  person  singular.8 

1  O.  F.  Emerson,    The  History  of  the  English  Language  (New  York,  1897,  p. 
375);  M.  Kaluza,  Historische  Grammatik  der  englischen  Sprache  (Berlin,  1901,  \  326). 

2  Cf.  Sachse,  p.  50.         ,  3  Meyer,  p.  80.  4  Hilmer,  p.  30. 
5Zetsche,  p.  47;  Bernard,  p.  77;  Hoffman,  p.  61. 

6Cf.  Ten  Brink,  \\  117,  186,  188,  190,  193,  194,  196,  261,  etc.;  Morsbach, 
Neuengl.  Schriftsprache,  p.  159. 

7  The  loss  of  the  resultant  final  -e  can  not  be  considered  apart  from  the  study 
of  metrics  and  will  not  therefore  be  discussed  here. 

8  Jonson  says  in  his  English  Grammar  (ed.  W.   Gifford,  The  Works  of  Ben 
Jonson,  London,  1816,  vol.  ix,  p.  305) :  '  But  now,  whatsoever  is  the  cause,  it  hath 
quite  grown  out  of  use,  and  that  other  so  generally  prevailed,  that  I  dare  not 
presume  to  set  this  afoot  again ;  albeit,  to  tell  you  my  opinion,  I  am  persuaded 
that  the  lack  hereof,  well  considered,  will  be  found  a  great  blemish  to  our  tongue.' 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     21 

A  revival  of  -en  is  seen  in  the  poetry  of  Spenser1  and  his  imitators,2 
but  it  had  long  passed  altogether  from  the  popular  speech. 

With  the  passage  of  inflectional  -en  from  the  Middle  English 
verb,  the  feeling  for  its  proper  use  became  dulled.  Writers  who 
have  attempted  to  use  the  archaic  language  of  the  Midland  have 
frequently  been  led  into  absurd  mistakes  by  neglecting  to  recognize 
the  grammatical  value  of  this  -en.  Some  remarkable  blunders  of 
this  kind  occur  in  the  Court  of  Love : B  Wheder  that  she  me 
helden  lefe  or  loth,  847 ;  I  kepen  in  no  wyse,  684 ;  For  if  by  me 
this  mater  springen  out,  725 ;  thay  kepten  been,  526,  in  which 
kepten  is  a  past  participle. 

Nor  have  editors  of  Middle  English  texts  been  wholly  free  from 
this  fault.  Urry  betrays  his  ignorance  of  the  value  of  the  Mid- 
land -en  by  giving  such  forms  as  these  in  his  edition  of  Chaucer : 4 
4  And  rage  he  couth  as  it  werin  a  whelpe  ; '  '  Of  studie  tookin  he 
most  cure  and  hede ; ?  ( This  duke  of  whome  I  makin  rnencion.' 5 

The  Midland,  by  virtue  of  its  geographical  position,  possessed, 
in  addition  to  -en  and  -eth,  a  plural  inflection  -es  that  has  been 
explained  as  due  either  to  the  borrowing  of  the  Northern  plural  -es  6 
or  to  the  preponderating  influence  of  the  Midland  third  singular.7 

1  G.  Wagner,  On  Spenser's  Use  of  Archaisms  (Halle,  1879,  p.  45). 

2  Lourisbury,  The  English  Language,  p.  412. 

8  Ed.  Skeat,  Chaucerian  and  Other  Pieces  (being  a  supplement  to  the  Complete 
Works  of  Geoffrey  Chaucer),  Oxford,  1897,  p.  409.  See  also  Skeat's  account  of  the 
misuse  of  -en,  p.  Ixxvii,  on  which  the  paragraph  above  is  based. 

*  J.  Urry,  Chaucer's  Works,  London,  1871. 

5  Cf.  Lounsbury,  Studies  in  Chaucer  (New  York,  1892,  I,  p.  287). 

6  Matzner,  I,  362 ;  Franz,  pp.  403-4 ;  Lounsbury,  History  of  the  English  Language, 
p.  413. 

T  Cf.  Pollert,  Die  3.  Person  Pluralis  auf  -s  bei  Shakespeare,  p.  59 ;.  Brandl,  I.  c. 
p.  Ixxxii. 

Prof.  C.  Alphonso  Smith  ('  Shakespeare's  Present  Indicative  s-  Endings  with 
Plural  Subjects,'  Publications  of  the  Modern  Language  Association,  xi,  363-376, 
followed  by  'The  Chief  Difference  between  the  First  and  Second  Folios  of 
Shakespeare,'  Englische  Studien,  xxx,  1-20)  maintains  '  that  in  is,  was,  -s  and  -tht 
used  with  plural  subjects,  we  have  not  instances  of  borrowing,  but  evidence  rather 
of  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  third  indicative  singular,  unchecked  by  the  formal 
laws  of  a  grammar-making  age,  to  establish  itself  as  the  norm,  and  thus  to  usurp 
the  place  held  by  the  indicative  plural.'  Storm  (Englische  Philologie,9 1,  807)  gives 
a  similar  explanation  :  '  Shakespeare,  der  geborene  Mittellander,  scheint  von  der 
in  der  siidenglischen  Volkssprache  herrschenden  Verwirrung  bisweilen  beriihrt 
zu  sein,  und  teils  aus  Unachtsamkeit,  teils  um  die  Volkssprache  nachzuahmen, 
teils  dem  Keim  zu  Liebe  den  Singular  fiir  den  Plural  zu  gebrauchen.' 


22     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

Although  the  usage  of  a  singular  verb  with  a  plural  subject 
was  common  in  the  North  (as  will  be  shown  in  the  next  chapter) 
and  was  doubtless  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  Midland  and  the 
South  as  well,1  yet  the  leveling  of  singular  and  plural  forms  was 
never  as  general  in  the  Midland  as  in  the  North.  The  fact  that 
the  use  of  the  s-plural  in  the  Midland  is  largely  restricted  to  the 
speech  of  the  uneducated  seems  to  point  to  the  carrying  over  of 
the  -s  of  the  third  singular  into  the  plural,  a  process  aided  by  the 
old  usage  of  a  singular  predicate  with  a  compound  subject.  But 
this  -s  of  the  singular  is  not  indigenous  to  the  Midland  and,  like 
that  of  the  plural,  is  to  be  explained  as  an  invasion  of  the  Midland 
by  the  inflections  of  the  North. 


1  In  the  Northern  and  the  Southern  of  the  Middle  English  period  the  plural 
and  the  third  singular  fell  together  except  in  the  case  of  is  and  was,  thus  render- 
ing all  discussion  of  this  point  for  these  dialects  largely  speculative. 

A  striking  parallel  to  this  invasion  of  the  plural  by  the  singular  inflection  is 
presented  by  the  modern  Scandinavian.  In  regard  to  this,  J.  A.  Lundell  (Paul's 
Grundrissf  1, 1488)  says :  *  Im  Verb  ist  (ausser  Far.-Isl.)  der  Konj.  im  Schwinden 
— im  Ostschwed.  gibt  es  davon  keine  Spur  mehr, — ebenso  besondere  Pluralform 
im  Indik. :  in  finland.,  schwed.  (etwa  Halland  und  das  siidlichste  Westergotland 
ausgenommen)  und  danischen  Mundarten  (ein  paar  schleswigsche  Kirchspiele 
ausgenommen)  wird  die  Sing. -Form  immer,  in  Norwegen  gewo'hnlich  auch  bei 
pluralem  Subjekt  verwandt.' 


C.-THE  INFLECTION  OF  THE  PRESENT  PLURAL 
INDICATIVE  IN  THE  NORTH. 

I.    THE  LEADING  EXPLANATIONS  OF  THE 
NORTHERN  INFLECTIONS. 


Retracing  our  steps,  we  find  in  JBouterwek's  Die  Vier  Evangelien 
in  Altnordhumbrischer  Sprache  (Giitersloh,  1857,  p.  cliv),  the  occur- 
rence of  vocalic  endings  in  the  North  explained  in  the  following 
manner  : 

In  the  Anglo-Saxon  conjugation  the  ending  -on,  -en  occurs  in  the 
plural  of  the  preterit  indicative  and  of  the  present  and  preterit  sub- 
junctive. In  these  forms  the  -n  is  very  often  lost  in  Northumbrian,  in 
consequence  of  which  the  plural  of  the  preterit  subjunctive  has  the 
same  form  as  the  singular.  The  plural  present  indicative  of  wosa, 
esse  also  shares  in  this  process,  particularly  in  the  second  person  when 
the  personal  pronoun  ge  follows  and  is  enclitically  attached  to  the 
verb :  ue  ne  aru  ue,  nos  non  sumus,  John  vm,  41 ;  aro  ge  or  gie 
instead  of  aron  ge  or  gie,  estis ;  also  once  bifto,  sunt,  Mark  in,  28. 

In  a  similar  vein  is  the  language  of  Sievers  (Angelsdchsische 
Grammatik,  Halle,  1882,  §  360,  note) : 

Originally  this  apocope  was  restricted  to  final  -n,  that  is,  it  affected 
only  the  adhortative  forms  of  the  present  (-an  and  optatival  -en,  the 
latter  especially  frequent  with  negative  imperatives)  and  the  whole 
preterit;  in  Northumbrian  and  the  Psalter,  -e  for  -«$  is  therefore 
wholly  wanting ;  in  West-Saxon,  on  the  contrary,  the  curtailment  has 
been  carried  over  also  into  the  indicative  and  the  real  imperative. 

In  the  second  edition  (1886)  of  Sievers's  grammar,  this  is 
repeated  without  alteration,  but  in  the  third  edition  (1898)  a 
marked  change  has  been  made. 

Originally  the  curtailment  affected  only  the  verb-forms  in  -n,  that 
is,  the  adhortative  forms  of  the  present  (the  real  adhortatival  -an  of 
the  first  plural  as  well  as  the  optatival  -en,  the  latter  especially  frequent 
with  negative  imperatives),  the  optative  and  the  preterit  (including  the 

23 


24     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

present  forms  of  the  preterit! ve  presents).  From  these  n-forms  the 
curtailment  is  then  analogically  carried  over  also  to  the  original  -aft- 
forms.  In  this  process  the  optative  especially  seems  to  have  served  as 
a  pattern  for  the  indicative  (compare  the  West-Saxon  hcebbe  we,  but 
also  forms  like  the  indicative  habbon  we,  imperative  nallon  ge  beside 
nallaft  ge,  R2).  Only  in  the  South  has  the  carrying  over  of  curtailed 
forms  into  the  indicative  and  the  imperative  proper  taken  place  to 
a  considerable  degree :  already  in  the  Cura  Pastoralis  the  -e  predomi- 
nates. The  Anglian  dialects,  on  the  other  hand,  present  numerous 
short  forms  for  old  -en,  -an,  -un,  but  still  preserve  old  -aft  we,  ge,  etc., 
in  the  main  unimpaired ;  however,  Rl  has  exceptionally  an  indicative 
sitte  git,  R2  an  indicative  forstonde  we  (with  which  compare  the  indica- 
tive habbon  we,  imperative  nallon  gie  beside  the  usual  nallaft  gie)  ;  each 
of  the  Lindisfarne  Gospels  an  indicative,  nabbo  we,  walla  we,  and  walli 
ge.  Curtailed  forms  occur  with  somewhat  greater  frequency  in  the 
Ritual,  where  the  Latin  original  would  lead  one  to  expect  an  indica- 
tive present. 

Attention  had  previously  been  called  to  the  occurrence  of  vocalic 
forms  in  the  Ritual  by  U.  Lindelof  (Die  Sprache  des  Rituals  von 
Durham,  Helsingfors,  1890,  p.  78).  After  recording  the  fact  that 
the  number  of  ^>-forms  in  the  present  indicative  plural  exceeds 
that  of  the  s-forms,  Lindelof  says : 

Besides  these  formations  there  are  in  the  Ritual  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  present  plurals,  which  end  in  a  vowel  (-a  or  -e).  In  West-Saxon, 
as  is  well  known,  there  frequently  occurs  instead  of  -aft  a  shorter  end- 
ing -e,  if  one  of  the  pronouns  we  or  ge  immediately  follows  the  verb. 
According  to  Sievers,  this  -e  for  -aft  is  not  found  in  the  North,  this 
dialect  apocopating  only  forms  in  original  final  -n.  The  Ritual,  how- 
ever, does  not  confirm  this  assertion;  there  are  found  in  it  various 
instances  of  curtailed  forms  (ending  in  -a  or  -e)  which  we  must  prob- 
ably regard  as  indicatives ;  e.  g.  bidde  ve  (precamur),  162,2 ;  gifylga 
ve  (prosequimur),  71,10 ;  gimersiga  ve  (celebramus),  48,20 ;  habba  ve, 
89,2;  91,3;  gifeaia  ve  (gaudemus),  93,3.  Yet  it  must  be  granted 
that  the  glossator  could  have  perhaps  construed  a  few  of  these  forms 
as  subjunctives.  Aside  from  the  cases  mentioned,  there  are  still  some 
instances  of  vocalic  endings  in  the  plural  that  translate  Latin  present 
plural  indicatives :  we  bihalda  (abstinemus),  17,7 ;  ve  deadiga  (mori- 
mur),  26,19;  we  deadia  and  we  lifia,  26,20;  etc.  Whether  these 
forms  are  meant  to  be  real  subjunctives  or  whether  they  are  to  be 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     25 

regarded  merely  as  analogical  formations  on  the  subjunctive,  I  do  not 
venture  to  decide. 

A  detailed  consideration  of  these  vocalic  forms  in  the  Ritual  is 
given  in  the  following  chapter. 

The  few  vocalic  endings  recorded  by  Miss  Elizabeth  Mary  Lea 
('  The  Language  of  the  Northumbrian  Gloss  to  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Mark,'  Anglia,  xvi,  p.  140)  are  chiefly  preteritive  presents.  '  In 
cases  where  one  of  the  Pronouns  we1  or  g£  stands  immediately 
after  the  verb,  as  a  rule  the  ordinary  plural  form  in  -aft,  -as  is 
found. '  The  forms  in  -p  predominate  slightly  over  those  in  -s. 

Similar  results  are  obtained  by  H.  Ftichsel  ('  Die  sprache  der 
Northumbrischen  interlinearversion  zum  Johannes- Evangelium,' 
Anglia,  xxiv,  61). 

Both  of  these  monographs  corroborate  the  remark  of  Sievers 
(Angelsachsische  Grammatik, 3  §  354,  note  2)  that  in  the  Northern 
texts  the  inflection  of  the  verb  has  been  thrown  into  great  confu- 
sion, either  through  the  actual  process  of  decomposition  in  the 
language  itself  or  through  the  sheer  awkwardness  of  the  glossators 
in  rendering  the  Latin  forms  of  the  original. 

Sievers  (§  358,  note  2)  had  asserted  concerning  the  second  and 
third  singular  indicative : 

In  Northumbrian,  a  and,  less  frequently  in  the  Lindisfarne  Gospels 
and  the  Ritual,  also  ce  occur  beside  the  usual  e,  in  consequence  of 
confusion  with  the  endings  of  the  second  weak  conjugation.  Thus 
there  stand  side  by  side  forms  like  the  second  singular  bindes  and 
bindas,  -ces  (Gospels,  bindeft,  -aft,  -a$$),  third  singular  bindeft,  -es  and 
bindaft,  -ceft  or  bindas,  -ces. 

But  Lindeldf  in  his  new  study,  Die  Sudnorthumbrische  Mund- 
art  des  10.  Jahrhunderts :  Die  Sprache  der  sog.  Glosse  Rushworth2 
(Banner  Beitrdge  zur  Anglistik,  x,  129),  comments  as  follows  on 
the  occurrence  of  -cr$  twenty-three  times  and  -as  nine  times  in  the 
third  person  singular  of  the  present  indicative  : 

In  the  occurrence  of  these  endings,  I  should  not  like  so  much  to  see 
the  influence  of  the  weak  verbs  of  the  second  class  (compare  Sievers, 
§  358,  note  2)  as  the  employment  of  plural  forms  in  the  singular.  All 
the  forms  in  -aft,  -as  adduced  above  have  a  decidedly  plural  aspect 


26     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

(o-umlaut  in  niomaft,  cweoftaft  etc.,  u  in  cumaft  contrasted  with  the 
singular  cymeft,  etc.).  In  Eu.2  the  indicative  plural  present  and  the 
second  plural  imperative  end  in  -aft  (c.  120)  or  -as  (c.  145).  .  .  .  Be- 
sides these,  the  ending  -eft  occurs  seventeen  times  and  the  ending  -es 
seven  times.  .  .  .  Here  it  is  certainly  not  a  question  of  the  weakening 
of  the  final  vowel  or  of  the  carrying  over  of  the  singular  ending,  but, 
as  the  forms  cymeft,  cwefteft,  etc.  demonstrate,  it  is  a  case  of  the  use  of 
the  singular  form  in  a  plural  function.  Also  when  the  pronouns  we, 
ge  immediately  follow,  Ru?  regularly  preserves  the  ending  -aft,  -as; 
yetforstonde  we  occurs  once. 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  account  for  the  s-forms  of 
the  present  indicative  plural  in  Old  Northumbrian.  Bouterwek 
(p.  cxlvi)  thinks  the  interchange  of  -s  and  -ft  indicates  an  arbitrary 
pronunciation  of  -ft.  Murray  says  : * 

'  The  Greek  not  only  expels  the  n,  but,  like  the  Northern  English 
and  Scotch,  changes  the  dental  into  s,  <£ep-ovon,  for  <£ep-owri,  Latin 
fer-unt,  Sanscrit  bhar-anti,  M.  Goth,  bair-and,  Ags.  ber-aft,  Old  Midi. 
Eng.  ber-en,  Old  Southern  ber-eth,  Old  Northern  ber-es.' 

Sweet  says  (History  of  English  Sounds,  Oxford,  1888,  §  526): 

1  The  change  of  final  p  into  s  in  verb-inflections  in  1.  North.,  as  in 
bindes,  bindas=;WS  bint  (Angl.  bindep),  bindap  seems  to  be  organic, 
as  there  do  not  seem  to  be  any  analogical  influences  at  work/ 

This  view  appears  to  have  the  support  of  Biilbring  (Altenglisches 
Mementarbuch, — 7.  Teil:  Lautlehre,  Heidelberg,  1902,  §  569): 

Final  p  of  the  unaccented  endings  -ep  and  ~ap  in  the  third  singular 
and  the  plural  present  frequently  passes  over  into  s  in  late  Northum- 
brian :  third  singular  bindeft,  bindes,  '  binds,'  plural  bindaft,  bindas, 
imperative  plural  far  aft,  faros,  'go.' 

The  principles  that  regulate  the  use  of  the  different  inflections  of 
the  present  plural  indicative  in  Middle  Northern  have,  in  their 
broad  outlines,  been  clearly  stated  by  Murray  (The  Dialect  of  the 
Southern  Counties  of  Scotland,  p.  211  ff.) : 

1  The  Dialect  of  the  Southern  Counties  of  Scotland  ( Transactions  of  the  Philological 
Society,  1870-72,  p.  212). 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     27 

'  In  the  present  tense,  aa  leyke,  wey  leyke,  yee  leyke,  thay  leyke,  are 
used  only  when  the  verb  is  accompanied  by  its  proper  pronoun ;  when 
the  subject  is  a  noun,  adjective,  interrogative  or  relative  pronoun,  or 
when  the  verb  and  subject  are  separated  by  a  clause,  the  verb  takes 
the  termination  -s  in  all  persons.  Thus  "  aa  cum  fyrst ;  yt's  mey  at 
cums  fyrst ;  wey  gang  theare ;  huz  tweae  quheyles  gangs  theare ;  yt's 
huz  at  says  seae ;  ye  sey  quhat  thay  mein ;  yuw  eanes  seys  quhat  thir 
meins."  ...  In  the  Old  North- Anglian,  the  conjugation  was : — 

Ih  cyme  we  cyrn-es  "} 

$u  cym-es        gee  cym-es  V  or  cyme  we,  gee,  fa 

he  cym-es        hea  or  ]?a  cym-es  ) 

But  before  the  date  of  the  earliest  Northern  writings  of  the  13th  cen- 
tury, the  form  without  the  -s  had  been  extended  to  all  cases  in  which 
the  verb  was  accompanied  by  its  proper  pronoun,  whether  before  or 
after  it,  leaving  the  full  form  in  -3  to  be  used  with  other  nomina- 
tives only.' 

So  nearly  definitive  was  the  work  of  Murray  as  regards  the  verb 
forms  in  Middle  Northern  that  no  fuller  explanation  of  the  vary- 
ing inflections  in  the  indicative  present  has  appeared  since  the 
publication  of  his  study.  Miss  Lucy  Toulmin  Smith  follows 
Murray  in  her  Introduction  to  the  York  Plays  (Oxford,  1885, 
p.  Ixxii),  citing  as  variant  forms  we  (ge,  pai)  syng(e)  but  we  (ge,pai) 
that  synges  ;  pe  briddes  synges  ;  we  ga  hame  and  tas  reste. 

It  may  be  presumed  that  Schleich  was  not  acquainted  with  the 
work  of  Murray,  when,  in  his  edition  of  Ywain  and  Gawain 
(Oppeln  and  Leipzig,  1887,  p.  xviii),  he  made  the  following 
assertions  concerning  the  forms  of  the  indicative  present : 

The  whole  plural  is  in  the  main  uninflected.  In  the  rimes  I  have 
found  only  one  instance  each  of  the  second  and  third  person  standing 
without  inflection,  namely  ge  Icnaw  (:  thraw,  2362)  and  pai  dwell 
(:  omell,  1435).  .  .  .  Moreover,  the  ending  s,  es  is  frequently  found 
but  is  never  certified  by  the  rime:  compare  we  suffers,  3044;  ge 
thinJces,  1530,  1538  ;  pai  herkens,  4 ;  uses,  36 ;  makes,  37,  39 ;  grevesy 
508 ;  findes,  1656 ;  has  1655,  etc. 

But  the  phrase  in  1.  3044  is  not  we  suffers  as  Schleich  asserts. 
Together  with  the  preceding  line,  it  reads : — ]>an  sal  we  pas  al 


28     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

hejnn  quite, pat  here  suffers  al  this  despite;  11.  1530  and  1538  : — 
Whils  ge  it  have  and  thinkes  on  me ;  1.  4  : — pat  herkens  Ywayne 
and  Gawayne;  1.  36: — men  uses;  11.  37  and  39: — men  makes; 
1.  508 : — His  wordes  greves  me  right  noght.  All  the  other 
instances  adduced  by  Schleich  are  cases  in  which  the  subject  is 
either  a  noun  or  a  relative  and  in  which,  consequently,  the  form 
without  -s  would  have  been  as  great  an  irregularity  as  the  form 
with  -s  would  have  been  when  the  personal  pronoun  immediately 
precedes  the  verb. 

In  the  following  monographs  no  attempt  has  been  made  to 
ascertain  more  accurately  than  Murray  had  done  the  principles 
underlying  the  difference  in  usage  of  the  Northern  inflected  and 
uninflected  forms.  The  authors  of  many  of  these  studies  are  con- 
cerned only  secondarily  with  questions  of  inflection  and  should  not 
therefore  be  expected  to  advance  our  knowledge  on  this  point. 
Some  do  not  appear  to  be  aware  of  Murray's  work  and  generalize 
on  the  endings  of  the  plural  without  any  reference  to  the  nature  of 
the  subject  of  the  verb.  Others  who  make  a  distinction  in  this 
respect  have  evidently  overlooked  the  fact  that  the  inflection  of  a 
Northern  verb  is  affected  by  the  distance  from  its  pronominal 
subject. 

A.  Ackermann,  Die  Spraehe  der  dltesten  sehottischen  Urkunden,  A.  D. 
1385-1440  (Berlin,  1897). 

M.  Adler,  Uber  die  Richard  Rolle  de  Hampole  zugesehriebene  Para- 
phrase der  sieben  Busspsalmen  (Altenburg,  1885,  p.  9). 

Ida  Baumann,  Die  Spraehe  der  Urkunden  aus  Yorkshire  im  15. 
Jahrhundert  (Heidelberg,  1902,  p.  101). 

F.  J.  Bierbaum,    Uber  Lawrence  Minot  und  seine  Lieder  (Halle, 
1876,  p.  37). 

K.  Boddeker,  'Uber  die  Spraehe  der  Benediktinerreger  (Englisehe 
Studien,  n,  376). 

G.  Brade,    Uber  Huehown's  Pistil  of  Swete  Susan  (Breslau,  1892, 
p.  17). 

P.  Buss,  'Sind  die  von  Horstmann  herausgegebenen  sehottischen 
Legenden  ein  Werk  Barbere's?'  (Anglia,  ix,  510). 

C.  L.  Crow,  Zur  Geschichte  des  kurzen  Reimpaars  im  Mittelenglischen 
(Gottingen,  1892,  p.  28). 

B.  Dannenberg,  Metrik  und  Spraehe  der  mittelengl.  Romanze,  The 
JSege  off  Melayne  (Gottingen,  1890,  p.  43). 


I  I 

Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     2& 

A.  R.  Diebler,  Henrisone's  Fabeldichtungen  (Halle,  1885,  p.  31). 

R.  Eule,  Untersuchungen  uber  die  nordengl.  Version  des  Octavian 
(Halle  dies.,  1889). 

G.  T.  Fiona,  Scandinavian  Influence  on  Southern  Lowland  Scotch 
(New  York,  1900). 

H.  Gerken,  Die  Sprache  des  Bischofs  Douglas  von  Dunkeld  (  Vocalis- 
mus  und  Consonantismus  der  Reimworter)  nebst  An  hang :  Zur  Echt- 
heitsfrage  des  King  Hart  (Strassburg,  1898). 

J.  Gutmann,  Untersuchungen  uber  das  mittelengl.  Gedicht,  The 
Buke  of  the  Howlat  (Halle,  1892,  pp.  36-37). 

W.  Hagedorn,  Uber  die  Sprache  einiger  nordlicher  Chaucer  schuler 
(Gottingen,  1892). 

J.  B.  Henneman,  Untersuchungen  uber  das  mittelengl.  Gedicht,  Wars 
of  Alexander  (Berlin,  1889). 

F.  H.  Henschel,  Darstellung  der  Flexionslehre  in  John  Barbour's 
Bruce  (Leipzig,  1886,  p.  69). 

A.  Herrmann,  Untersuchungen  uber  das  schottische  Alexanderbuch 
(Halle,  1893,  p.  48). 

O.  Herttrich,  Studien  zu  den  York  Plays  (Breslau,  1886). 

R.  H.  Hudnall,  A  Presentation  of  the  Grammatical  Inflections  in 
Andrew  of  Wyntouris  Orygynale  Cronykil  of  Scotland  (Leipzig,  1898, 
p.  90). 

P.  Kamann,  Uber  Quellen  und  Sprache  der  York  Plays  (Halle, 
1876,  p.  37). 

J.  Kaufmann,  Traite  de  la  Langue  du  Poete  ecossais  William  Dun- 
bar  (Bonn,  1873,  p.  95). 

G.  Knauff,  Studien  uber  Sir  David  Lyndsay  (Berlin,  1885). 

H.  Koster,  Huchowris  Pistel  of  Swete  Susan, — Kritische  Ausgabe 
(Strassburg,  1895,  I,  59). 

O.  Lengert,  Die  schottische  Romanze  Roswall  and  Lillian  (Leipzig, 
1892). 

H.  Lessmann,  Studien  zu  dem  mittelengl.  Life  of  St.  Outhbert  (Darm- 
stadt, 1896). 

H.  Lu'bke,  The  Aunters  of  Arthur  at  the  Tern-Wathelan  (Berlin, 
1883). 

F.  Mennicken, '  Versbau  und  Sprache  in  Huchowns  Morte  Arthure ' 
(Bonner  Beitrdge  zur  Anglistik,  v,  119). 

O.  Noltemeier,  Uber  die  Sprache  des  Gedichts,  The  Knightly  Tale  of 
Golagros  and  Gawane  (Marburg,  1889,  p.  52). 

L.  Ostermann, '  Untersuchungen  zu  Ratis  Raving  und  dem  Gedicht, 
The  Thewis  of  Gud  Women '  (Bonner  Beitrdge  zur  Anglistik,  xn,  61). 


30     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

M.  L.  Perrin,  Uber  Thomas  Castelford's  Chronik  von  England 
(Boston,  1891,  pp.  26-27). 

W.  P.  Keeves,  A  Study  in  the  Language  of  Scottish  Prose  before  1600 
(Baltimore,  1893). 

G.  Reichel,  Studien  zu  der  schottischen  Romanze,  The  History  of  Sir 
Eger,  Sir  Grime,  and  Sir  Gray-Steel  (Darmstadt,  1893V 

O.  Retzlaff,  Untersuchungen  uber  den  nordengl.  Legendencyclus  der 
MSS.  Harleian  4196  und  Cotton.  Tib.  E  VII.  (Berlin,  1888,  p.  50). 

W.  Scholle,  Laurence  Minot's  Lieder  (Strassburg,  1884,  p.  xxiv). 

H.  StefFens,  'Versbau  und  Sprache  des  mittelengl.  stabreimenden 
Gedichtes,  The  Wars  of  Alexander'  (JBonner  Beitr'dge  zur  Anglistik,  ix). 

M.  Tonndorf,  Rauf  Coilyear,  Ein  mittelsehottisehes  Gedieht  (Halle, 
1893,  p.  39). 

['  J.  Ullmann,  'Studien  zu  Richard  Rolle  de  Hampole'  (Englische 
Studien,  vn,  427). 

H.  Wende,  Uberlieferung  und  Spraehe  der  mittelengl.  Version  des 
Psalters  und  ihr  Verhdltnis  zur  lateinisehen  Vorlage  (Breslau,  1884). 

W.  Wischmann,  Untersuchungen  uber  das  Kingis  Quair  Jacobs  I. 
von  Schottland  (Wismar,  1887,  pp.  17-20). 

A.  Zielke,  Untersuchungen  zu  Sir  Eglamour  of  Artois  (Kiel,  1889). 

II.      THE   HISTORICAL   DEVELOPMENT   OF   THE    NORTHERN 

INFLECTIONS  OF  THE  PRESENT  PLURAL 

INDICATIVE. 

1.     The  Old  Northumbrian. 

From  the  preceding  sections  it  has  been  seen  that  the  Durham 
Ritual  presents  a  more  advanced,  that  is  a  more  nearly  modern, 
stage  of  inflection  than  does  any  other  Early  Northumbrian  text. 
It  is  also  evident  that  the  choice  of  present  indicative  plural  end- 
ings in  Middle  Northern  is  determined  solely  by  syntactic  condi- 
tions. Can  it  be  that  these  conditions  were  in  any  degree  present 
in  Old  Northumbrian  ?  If  so,  when  and  how  did  they  first  mani- 
fest themselves  and  what  was  their  historical  development  ?  These 
questions  constitute  the  main  subject  of  study  in  the  present  chapter. 

Durham  Ritual.1 
A.     Endings  in  -$.2 

1  Ed.  Stevenson,  Publications  of  the  Surtees  Society,  London,  1839. 
1  Throughout  this  chapter  no  attempt  is  made  to  enumerate  all  the  endings 
nnless  it  is  so  stated. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     31 

1.  Noun-subject:  cynningas  giseaft,  55,19;  softfasto  .  .  .  liofaft, 
92,3;  onginnati  bloedsungas,  126,1 ;  gisdneft  softfcesto,  86,17. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  alle  giheraft,  89,2  ;  allo  .  .  .  iornafi,  5,17  ; 
gihergaft  mengo  (multi),  85,7. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :   %a  %e  gibrucaft,   99,2  ;   %a  %e 
fylgaK,  113,2 ;  $a  Ke  .  .  .  heriaK,  113,1. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  biddaft,  4,13  ;  we  gitrymmeft, 
11,12  ;  we  ongeattaft,  42,18  ;  hia  onfoeft,  92,9  ;  gie  .  .  .  giwcepnigaft, 
21,19. 

5.  Subject   unexpressed :   sceeaft,    5,9 ;  giheraft,  48,2 ;   settaft, 
187,17. 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1 .  Noun-subject :  None. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  None. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  %a  %e  .  .  .  sittes,  168,6  ;  $a  ¥>e  mec 
gicehtas,  168;4. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  biddas,  2,9  ;  gie  stondas,  60,1  ; 
we  ondredes  ¥>ec  and  scecas,  125,7;  wutas  gie,  24,18;  of 'Umbras 
gie,  82,16. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  gionwceldas,  86,18  ;  f'letas,  93,6  ;  doas, 
176,19. 

C.  Vocalic  endings.1 

1.  Noun-subject:  None. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  None. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  None. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject. — (a)  Verb  -f  pronoun  :  bidde  we 
(precamur),  162,2 ;  gidce  we  (faciemus),  4,2  ;  (agimus),  36,14 ;  gifeaia 
we  (gaudemus),  93,3;  gifylga  we  (prosequimur),  71,10;  habba  we 
(habemus),  89,2;  91,3;  gihreme  we  (imploramus),  37,2;  gimersiga 
we  (celebramus),  48,20;  82,2;  giscrinca  hia  (arrescunt),  125,18. 
To  these  may  be  added  aro  gie  (estis),  27,12  ;  28,12,  and  naro  gie 
(non  estis),  107,3,  contrasted  with  ne  aron  gie,  82,15. 

(b)   Pronoun  -f-  verb :   we  agefe  (exhibemus),  9,1 ;   we  bihalda 
usig   (abstinemus),    17,7;    hia  giclcensigo    (castigant),    18,8;    we 

1  With  the  exception  of  the  preteritive  presents,  all  the  vocalic  forms  of  the 
present  that  gloss  Latin  indicative  plurals  are  recorded. 


32     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

deadi(g}a  (morimur),  26,19  and  20;  gie  gidoe  (facitis),  14,1;  we 
giearnia  (meremur),  8,18  (Skeat's  collation1);  40,19;  41,2;  we 
gifeai(g)a  (gaudemus),  54,16 ,  75,10 ;  wegifeagu,  52,14  ;  we  gifylga 
(exequimur),  34,7  ;  we  lifia  (vivimus),  26,20 ;  we  lifiga  (vivemus), 
26,15;  we  (gi)mersia  (celebramus),  9,16;  69,12;  75,4;  89,8  and 
16 ;  eft  we  niwaia  (recensemus),  87,5 ;  we  onfoe  (suscipimus),  87,6  ; 
we  gisomniga  (congregamur),  172,4;  we  giftoncia  (gratulamur), 
74,4 ;  we  wor%i(g)a  (veneramur),  64,2  and  9  ;  67,4 ;  74,17  ;  89,13 ; 
(adoramus),  71,16  (Skeat's  collation). 

Vocalic  endings  occur  twice  when  the  subject-pronoun  is  not 
expressed :  gigladiga  (letamur),  49,9  audgimersia  (celebramus),  84,2. 

We  have,  then,  in  the  Durham  Ritual  forty-six  vocalic  forms 
that  translate  plural  indicatives  of  the  Latin  text.  That  the 
translator  correctly  construed  the  sense  of  the  original  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  these  verbs  are  properly  translated  when  they 
occur  elsewhere  in  the  text.  For  example,  non  habemus  pontifi- 
cem,  91,3  is  glossed  by  ne  habba  we  heh  bisc,'  whereas  in  the 
preceding  verse  habemus  pontificem  is  rendered  by  we  habbaft  heh 
bisc'  To  maintain  that  the  glossator  understood  the  Latin  in  the 
one  case  but  not  in  the  other  would  be  absurd.  It  is  true  that 
only  a  few  cases  are  as  plain  as  this,  but  it  may  be  confidently  held 
nevertheless  that  the  majority  of  these  vocalic  forms  are  indica- 
tives.2 

That  these  curtailed  forms  were  carried  over  into  the  indicative 
from  the  optative  with  the  consequent  dropping  not  of  -p  but  of 
-n,  has  been  shown  in  the  treatment  of  the  West-Saxon.  The 
influence  of  the  preteritive  presents  and  of  willan,  itself  originally 
an  optative,  in  producing  this  result  has  also  been  considered. 
With  these  must  be  associated  in  the  Northern  the  plural  aron 
which  readily  lent  itself  to  curtailment. 

The  categories  given  above  show  that  the  curtailed  form  is  used 
not  only  when  the  pronominal  subject  is  postpositive  but  when  it 
is  prepositive  as  well.  No  parallel  for  such  an  advanced  stage  of 
inflection  is  found  in  the  Early  Midland  or  in  the  Early  or  Middle 

1  The  Philological  Society's  Transactions,  1879,  Appendix  II. 

2  Lindelof  (Die  Sprache  des  Rituals  von  Durham,  p.  78)  concludes  his  discussion 
by  saying,  '  Ob  diese  Formen  wirkliche  Conjunctive  sein  sollen,  oder  ob  sie  nur 
als  Analogiebildungen  nach  dem  Conjunctiv  anzusehen  sind,  wage  ich  nicht 
zu  entscheiden.' 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     33 

Southern.  A  similar  procedure  in  Anglo-Saxon  is  found  only  in 
the  Lindisfarne  Gospels  of  Bernicia,  but  they  are  in  this  respect 
much  more  conservative  than  the  Ritual. 

Lindisfarne  Gospels.1 — Matthew. 

A.  Endings  in  -$. 

1.  Noun-subject:  witgo  arisaft,  xxiv,  11;  wceras  getele§,  xii, 
41 ;  fteqfas  .  .  .  forstelaft,  VI,  20. 

2.  Adjective-subject:  alle  nioma&,  xix,  11;  alle  .  .  .  habbaft, 
xxi,  26 ;  monig  .  .  .  cymmeft,  Xxiv,  5. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  %a  %e  hyncgra§,  v,  6 ;  %a  .  .  . 
cy%a%,  xxvn,  62. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  hiagesea^,  xm,  16  ;  we  getrewaft, 
xxvin,  14  ;  wallah  gie,  xx,  32. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  lufaft,  xxni,  6. 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  legeras  gewyrcas,  vi,  2;  hwcelpas  brucas,  xv, 
27;  duro  forestondes,  xvi,  18;  oweftas  menn,  xvi,  13;  cymes  .  .  . 
dagas,  ix,  15. 

2.  Adjective-subject:  monige  .  .  .  cymas  and  gehrestas,  vm,  11. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  $a  widlas,  xv,  20 ;  %a  $e  falles, 
xv,  27 ;  %a$e  .  .  .  utgaas,  XV,  18. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  hia  gesellas,  x,  17  ;  we  bidas,  xr, 
3;  gie  geheras,  xm,  14;  we  stiges,  XX,  18;  heras  hia,  xni,  13; 
nabbas  we,  xiv,  17 ;  stondes  ge,  xx,  6. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  wcexas  ne  Wynnes,  vi,  27. 

C.  Vocalic  endings. 

Numerous  curtailed  forms  occur  in  the  preteritive  presents,  where 
-n,  and  not  -$,  has  been  dropped,  The  curtailed  ending  is  also 
carried  over  by  analogy  to  walla  we  (<  wallan  we)  vi,  31 ;  gie 
welle  (vultis ;  Rl,  ge  willaft),  VII,  12 ;  gie  wellce  (vultis),  xi,  14 ; 
monig  wcelle  g[e~\cweada  (multi  dicent;  Rl,  monige  cwepaft),  vil, 
22.  Other  vocalic  forms  glossing  Latin  indicatives  are  we  gedrince 
(bibemns ;  Rl,  drincap  wee),  vi,  31 ;  ne  oncneu  ge  (non  intelligitis ; 
.B1,  ne  ongetaft  ge\  xvi,  11  ;  and  gie  geheras  and  ne  oncnceuge 

1  Ed.  Skeat,  Cambridge,  1871-1887. 
3 


34     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

(audietis  et  non  intelligitis),  xin,  14,  contrasted  with  ne  oncnauas 
hia  (neque  intelligunt)  in  the  same  context. 

The  intervention  of  two  substantives  between  the  verb  and  its 
subject  causes  the  inflection  -s  to  be  extended  to  the  first  singular 
in  ec  ic  monn  amm  under  mceht  hcefis,  vin,  9. 

Mark. 

A.  Endings  in  -$. 

1.  Noun-subject:    bytto   losaft,  II,  22;    habbaft   halo,  n,    17; 
cymeft  ftonne  dagas,  n,  20. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  alle  scecaft,  I,  37 ;  alle  onginnaft,  xm,  4. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject ;  %a  %e  heraft,  TV,  20 ;  %a  %e  .  .  . 
nabbaft,  II,  17 ;  x,  23 ;  %a  %e  ,  .  .forecymeft,  vii,  15. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject:  hia  fcestaft,  n,  18;  gie  doefo,  vii, 
9 ;  doaft  gie,  n,  24 ;  habbaft  gie,  vi,  38. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  cmeftaft,  I,  30;  cumaS,  in,  19. 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  ftegnas  ftine  ne  geongas,  vii,  5 ;  cwcefoas  .  .  . 
menu,  vin,  27  ;  cwceftas  %a  wuftuuto,  xn,  35. 

2.  Adjective  or  demonstrative  pronoun-subject :  %a  (ilia)  gewidle- 
gas,  vii,  20 ;  monigo  .  .  .  cymces,  xin,  6. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :   "Safte  gewidlas,  vii,  15 ;   -Sa  ^e 
cwceftas,  xir,  18  ;  $a  ^e  inn-gaas,  xii,  23. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :   Am  fcestas,  II,  20  ;   (/ie  haldas, 
Vii,  8  ;  ^ie  wutedlice  cwoeftas,  vii,  1 1 ;  forgefes  gie,  vii,  1 2  ;  habbas 
hia,  vin,  2. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  selles,  x,  33. 

C.  Vocalic  endings. 

Exclusive  of  the  preteritive  presents  and  wesan,  the  following 
vocalic  forms  translate  Latin  plural  indicatives :  wallige  (vultis ; 
R2,  wallasge),  xv,  12 ;  we  gelic-leta  welle  (adsimilabimus),  iv,  30 ; 
gie  onfce  (accipietis),  xi,  24 ;  and  unbinde  hia  (solvunt),  xi,  4. 

Luke. 
A.     Endings  in  -$. 

1.  Noun-subject :  deado  arisaft,  vii,  22 ;  staras  cymeft,  xii,  6 ; 
wceras  .  .  .  arisaft,  xi,  32 ;  cymaft  dagas,  xxi,  6 ;  xxm,  29 ; 
cymeS  dagas}  XVH,  22 ;  xix,  43. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     35 

2.  Adjective-subject :  alle  .  .  .  onginnaS,  xiv,  29 ;  boege  .  .  . 
fallaft,  vi,  59 ;  gaa$  alle,  11,  3. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject:  %a  %e  geheraft,  vin,  12;  $a  $e 
geseaft,  x,  20;  3a  $e  .  .  .  /ceSaS,  vi,  27;  $a  $e  iuh  wel  doeft, 
vi,  33. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  habbaft,  in,  8 ;  <^'e  c?oa$,  in, 
13;  Ma  cymaft,  xxi,  8;  we  abided,  vn,  19;  doa$  we,  in,  14; 
wutaft  gie,  x,  11 ;  cunnaft  gie,  xn,  56. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  hlinigaS,  xni,  29  ;  cymeS,  xni,  29. 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :   $a  celmertmenn  f adores  mines  monigfaldas, 
xv,  17. 

2.  Adjective  or  demonstrative  pronoun-subject :  Sas  geworftes, 
I,  20 ;  ftas  geswigas,  xix,  40 ;  menigo  .  .  .  scecas,  xm,  24. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :   ^a  $e  geseas,  xiv,  29 ;   $a  -Se 
ingeongas,  xi,  33 ;  "Sa  'Se  .  .  .  sittas,  i,  79. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  abidas,  vn,  20 ;  #ie  gemcetes, 
n,  12 ;  Aia  cymes,  xi,  33 ;  m#es  $^e,  vi,  46. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  cwoeftas,  xvii,  21 ;  geongas,  iv,  36. 

C.  Vocalic  forms. 

There  are  fewer  curtailed  endings  in  Luke  than  in  any  other 
gospel.  Latin  indicatives  are  glossed  by  vocalic  forms  in  nallo  we 
(nolumus),  xix,  14  and  gie  wodle  (vultis),  VI,  31. 

John. 

A.  Endings  in  -$. 

1.  Noun-subject :  %a  deado  geheraft,  V,  25  ;  werca  getrymeft,  v, 
36  ;  streamas  .  .  .  flowaft,  vn,  38. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  alle  .  .  .  geheraft,  v,  28  ;  alle  .  .  .  cymmeft, 
xi,  48. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  ftafte  gelefaft,  1, 12  ;  ftafte  neglefaft, 
VI,  64. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  gie  geseaft,  I,  51 ;  gie  alle  wun- 
driaft,  VII,  21 ;  gie  mec  lufaft,  xvi,  27  ;  gelefeft  ge,  iv,  48  ;  ne 
habbaft  gie,  vi,  53. 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.    Noun-subject:  ¥>a  scipo  stefn  his  geheras,  x,  3. 


36     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

2.  Adjective  or  possessive  pronoun-subject :  alle  cymmes,  m,  26  ; 
alle  gelefes,  xi,  48 ;  ongeattas  alle,  XIH,  35 ;  ongeatas  mec  mino, 
x,  14. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  ftafte  gewor^ias,  iv,  23  ;  $a$e  .  .  . 
getrymesj  v,  39. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  gesprecas,  in,  11 ;  hia  lifias, 
V,  25;  #ie  .  .  .  gedoemas,  vin,  15;  onfoas  gie,  in,  11 ;  Tie  habbas 
gie,  v,  38  ;  ne  gelefes  gie,  v,  38. 

5.  Subject  unexpressed  :  cwceftas,  vn,  26  ;  nabbas,  xv,  22. 

C.     Vocalic  endings. 

Vocalic  forms  are  given  for  the  following  Latin  indicatives  : 
nabbo  we  (non  habemus),  XIX,  15  ;  woe  gegeonge  (ibimus),  vi,  68  ; 
ge  ncette  (non  vultis),  x,  38  ;  we  dee  (facimus),  xi,  47 ;  gie  hcebbe 
(habetis),  xii,  36  ;  and  wyrcce  we  (faciemus),  XIV,  23. 

Curtailed  endings  in  the  imperative  plural  are  nolle  gie  (nolite), 
V,  45,  and  ncelle  gie,  vn,  24. 

From  the  categories  given  above  for  the  various  gospels  it  is 
seen  that  the  use  of  the  endings  -ft  or  -s  does  not  depend  on  the 
nature  of  the  subject.  On  the  other  hand,  the  curtailed  forms  are 
used  only  when  the  subject  is  a  personal  pronoun  and  immediately 
precedes  or  follows  the  verb.  But  even  when  this  last  condition 
is  observed,  the  curtailed  endings  in  all  the  Early  Northern  texts 
are  far  outnumbered  by  the  full  forms  in  -ft  or  -s. 

The  inflectional  -s  of  the  Northern  third  singular  and  the  indica- 
tive plural  has  been  explained  by  Murray,  Sweet,  and  Biilbring 
[quoted  above]  as  due  to  the  transition  of  %  to  s.  According  to 
this  view,  such  a  transition  occurs  only  in  the  case  of  final  -ft  of 
the  unaccented  endings  -eft  and  -aft.  This  explanation  has  the 
advantage  of  accounting  for  the  origin  of  -s  as  an  organic  process 
of  speech  rather  than  as  a  result  of  analogy.  Its  weakness  lies  in 
the  inability  of  its  advocates  to  cite  analogous  processes  outside  of 
these  verbal  endings. 

But  there  are  other  facts  that  tend  to  cast  suspicion  on  the  cor- 
rectness of  this  view.  The  organic  transition  from  ft  to  s  would 
explain  the  plurals  in  -as  but  not  those  in  -es,  an  inflection  that 
occurs  frequently  in  both  the  indicative  and  the  imperative  plural 
in  the  Durham  Ritual  and  the  Lindisfarne  Gospels.  In  Matthew 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     37 

alone  there  are  seventy-six  es-plurals  in  the  indicative  and  twenty- 
five  in  the  imperative,  a  total  far  too  large  to  be  explained  as  due 
to  scribal  errors. 

With  these  es-plurals  should  be  associated  the  plurals  in  -eft 
common  to  all  the  Early  Northern  texts.  Since  these  texts  were 
written  at  a  period  antedating  the  weakening  of  a  to  e  in  inflectional 
syllables,  these  plurals  in  -eft  and  -es  were  probably  formed  on 
the  analogy  of  the  -eft  and  -es  of  the  third  singular.  It  is  worthy 
of  note  here  that  the  inflection  -eft  in  the  singular  is  not  restricted 
to  the  third  person.  In  all  the  Early  Northern  texts,  it  is  occa- 
sionally used  as  the  inflection  of  the  second  singular.1  Since  this 
-eft  is  obviously  borrowed  from  the  third  person,  this  fact  could 
be  interpreted  as  indicating  a  close  organic  relation  between  the 
pronunciation  of  -ft  and  that  of  -s.  It  moreover  suggests  that  the 
-es  of  the  third  person  singular  could  have  been  borrowed  from 
the  second  singular,  to  which  it  originally  belonged.  The  latter 
inference  would  be  in  harmony  with  the  extention  of  -s  to  the  first 
singular  in  Matthew  vm,  9.  A  parallel  to  this  procedure  is  found 
in  the  Old  Norse  extension  of  -r  from  the  second  to  the  third 
person  singular,2  which  may  not  have  been  without  influence  on 
the  Old  Northumbrian.  In  like  manner  the  Old  Northumbrian 
extension  of  -s  to  the  plural  is  paralleled  by  the  later  Scandinavian 
use  of  -r  in  both  singular  and  plural.3  To  whichever  of  these 
causes  be  assigned  the  preference,  it  is  probable  that  both  factors — 
the  close  organic  relation  between  -ft  and  -s  and  the  extension  of 
the  -s  originating  in  the  second  person  singular  to  the  other  per- 
sons of  the  singular  and  to  the  plural — were  at  work  in  causing 
the  Northern  verbal  inflection  in  -s  to  assert  itself  to  the  exclusion 
of  the  ft-forms.4 

1  Sievers,  §  356,  note  2  ;  Lindelof,  p.  74. 

2  Noreen,  Altnordische  Grammatik,  i,  \  457,  note  2. 

3  Lundell,  Paul's  Grundriss,2  i,  1488  (quoted  above,  p.  22). 

4  Lindelof  (Die  sudnorthumbrische  Mundart,  p.  129),  while  discussing  such  forms 
as  cyme^Sj  cweftes  in  the  plural,  remarks,  '  Es  handelt  sich  hier  sicher  nicht  urn 
eine  schwachung  des  endungsvocals,  bezw.  eine  iibertragung  der  endung  des  sing., 
sondern,  wie  die  formen  cyme's,  cwefteft  u.  s.  w.  beweisen,  urn  die  anwendung  der 
singularforin  in  pluralischer  function.'     But  this  explanation  would  not  account 
for  geniomes  (rapiunt),  Lind.  Matt,  xi,  12  and  the  frequent  use  of  cymaft,  cymas  as 
plurals.     Transference  of  endings  is  clearly  shown  in  lio/eft  (vivet),  Lind.  John 
vi,  57  beside  the  regular  liafalS  in  the  next  verse. 


38     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural 


2.     The  Middle  Northern. 

The  investigation  of  the  later  Northern  dialect  is  greatly  embar- 
rassed by  the  non-preservation  of  any  considerable  texts  that  would 
reveal  its  development  between  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh 
and  the  close  of  the  thirteenth  century.1  In  the  absence  of  such 
transitional  texts,  the  successive  changes  in  the  inflection  can  be 
inferred  only  from  a  knowledge  of  the  conditions  that  prevailed 
on  each  side  of  this  period. 

The  earliest  published  Northern  texts  of  the  Middle  English 
period  are  the  Cursor  Mundi  and  the  Surtees  Psalter.  Ten  Brink 2 
and  Brandl 3  regard  the  latter  as  the  older  of  the  two,  but  its  use 
of  Midland  inflections  detracts  from  its  value  as  a  text,  representa- 
tive of  the  Northern  dialect.  The  Cursor  Mundi,  besides  being 
practically  contemporaneous  4  with  the  Psalter,  is  far  more  regular 
in  its  inflections. 

Cursor  Mundi.     (c.  1300.) 

The  first  five  thousand  lines  of  MS.  Cotton  Vespasian  A  iii. 
have  been  selected.5  According  to  H.  Hupe,  this  manuscript  is  in 
the  Durham  dialect  of  the  first  half  of  the  fourteenth  century.6 

1  The  few  fragments  of  this  period  that  are  preserved  to  us  contain  too  often 
Southern  as  well  as  Northern  forms.     This  is  the  case  with  the  Charter  of 
Ranulph,  Bishop  of  Durham  (c.  1099),  printed  by  Hickes  (Thesaurus,  I,  149), 
and  more  accurately  by  Murray,  p.  22.     Neither  this  charter  nor  the  three 
short  fragments  by  Godric  (died  1170),  published  by  Zupitza  (Engl.  Studien,  xr, 
401-432),  contain  any  present  plural  indicatives.     A  Scotch  song  in  derision  of 
the  English  at  the  siege  of  Berwick,   1296  has  been  preserved  in  Fabyan's 
Chronicles  (printed  by  Pynson,  1516  and  reprinted  by  H.  Ellis,  London,  1811). 
In  this  song  (p.  398)  the  imperative  plural  has  the  ending  -s,  but  in  the  later  song 
(p.  440)  of  1328  the  Southern  inflection  is  used  in  the  indicative  plural  makyth. 

2  Geschichte  der  Engl.  Litleratur,  Strassburg,  1899,  I,  332. 

3 Brandl  says  (Paul's  Grundriss1,  n,  649):  'Das  alteste  Denkmal,  abgesehen 
von  einer  Umschreibung  der  Ancren  Riwle,  ist  vielleicht  eine  Psalteriibersetzung, 
bearbeitet  nach  der  Vulgata  in  kurzen  Keimparen,  noch  mit  einigen  mittelland- 
ischen  Anklangen  in  der  Sprache  und  mit  einer  Steifheit  des  Stils,  wie  sie  bei 
einem  literarisch  ungepflegten  Dialekt  begreiflich  ist.' 

4  The  New  English  Dictionary,  s.  v.  erde  and  hield  respectively,  places  the  date 
of  the  Cursor  Mundi  and  of  the  Psalter  before  1300. 

5  Ed.  Morris,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  57  and  59. 

6  On  the  Filiation  and  the  Text  of  the  MSS.  of  the  Middle-English  Poem  Cursor 
Mundi  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  101,  p.  103  and  p.  125). 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     39 

A.  Endings  in  -•$  :  None.1 

B.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:    many  thosand   lesis,   6;   clerkes  sais,  343; 
thinges  halds,  582;  dedis  .  .  .  tas,  43;  mightes  .  .  .  wons,  570; 
beistes  .  .  .  has,  4211 ;  has  beistes,  4216 ;  corns  god  peres,  37;  a# 
watres  sinJces  (:  mans  womb  .  .  .  drinkes),  535. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  pis  four  mas,  1318. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  poem  .  .  .  pat  rages,  48  ;  airs  pat 
cums,  2374;   alle  pat  wonnes,  3706;   6estes  .  .  .pat  has,  4219; 
pynges pat pam  likes  best,  26  ;  pat  par  singes  (:  a  wet  springes),  1031. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :    Als  gee  wil  luue  your  aun  hele, 
And  geildes  til  your  creatur,  1985 ;  Sin  we  wit  hus  now  broght  has 
nan,  3167  ;  gee  gain  me  has,  2062. 

C.  Uninflected  forms. 

1.  Noun-subject:  None. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  None. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject : — There  are  two  instances  of  the 
uninflected  verb  used  with  a  relative  pronoun-subject :  ful  il  ha[y£] 
pai  pat  spending  spend  pat  findes  nafro\te~\  par-of  at  end,  257  and 
pir  chapmen  pat  haue  Joseph  boght   Un-til  Egipte  pai  haue  him 
broght,  4239.     In  the  first,  the  whole  passage,  when  compared 
with  the  other  manuscripts,  becomes  suspicious.     In  the  second, 
pat  haue  was  probably  caused  by  pai  haue  in  the  next  line. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject. 

(a)  Pronoun  -j-  verb  :  we  find,  294 ;  pei  bring,  1039 ;  yee  haf, 
1949  ;  we  ta,  4790 ;  we  ha,  4912 ;  we  prai,  4837  ;  gee  hald,  2896  ; 
gee  her,  2327 ;  we  find  (:  strind),  2143 ;  (:  wynd),  399 ;  pai  fall 
(:  bal),  2880;  we  .  .  .  find  (:  angel  kynd),  361.  As  the  examples 
in  the  last  section  show,  the  verb  should  assume  the  inflected  form 
when  at  a  distance  from  its  subject,  but  the  necessity  of  rime  causes 
it  to  assume  occasionally  the  uninflected  form.  In  the  Cursor 
Mundi,  the  verb  has  normally  the  uninflected  form  if  only  one 
word  comes  between  it  and  its  personal  pronoun-subject :  Quen 
pai  pe  see,  2407 ;  yee  funden  have,  4801 ;  pai  forth  cum,  3423. 
If  two  or  more  words  intervene,  the  form  in  -s  is  usually  required. 

1  Since  these  endings  do  not  occur  in  Middle  Northern,  this  category  will  not 
again  be  mentioned. 


40     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural, 

The  scansion  of  the  lines  shows  that  -e  in  the  present  indicative 
plural  does  not  have  syllabic  value :  Sol  elles  we  come  for  mikel 
nede,  4826 ;  als  ge  haue  sene  inogh  and  hard,  92 ;  For  pis  resun 
pat  gee  haue  hard,  551 ;  Yee  haue  noght  gain  him  bot  enuy,  4140. 
From  these  examples  it  is  seen  that  -e  is  frequently  written  as 
a  supporting  vowel  for  certain  consonants  or  to  indicate  the  length 
of  a  preceding  vowel,  but  this  usage  is  by  no  means  uniform. 
Compare  we  ha,  4912  and  yee  haf,  1949  with  the  forms  just  given. 

(b)  Verb  +  pronoun  :  Of  all  pere  liif  spend  pai  pe  stage,  50 ; 
To  se  pe  saul  haf  ye  na  might,  580 ;  duell  pai,  3073 ;  find  yee, 
4956  ;  haldpai,  2281 ;  ha  pai,  2849  ;  ha  we,  5093.  Forms  in  -e 
occasionally  occur  but  without  syllabic  value :  Wene  yee  pe  king 
tresur  at  hydef  4902;  Ne  haue  we  wit  us  trussed  noght,  4911. 
There  is  only  one  instance  where,  from  the  scansion  of  the  line, 
the  -e  could  count  as  a  syllable :  "  Ch&der"  he  said,  "  quat  rede 
gee?"  1874. 

In  the  case  of  the  substantive  verb,  is  frequently  occurs  with 
a  plural  subject:  thre  thingespam  is  wit-jn,  354;  Elleuen  breper  es 
we  liuand,  4847.  The  modals  are  uninflected  throughout.1 

When  used  without  a  pronominal  subject,  the  imperative  plural 
ends  in  -8 :  sittes,  4975 ;  ne  dos,  2794 ;  gas,  4803 ;  otherwise  the 
verb  is  uninflected  :  "  Rises  up,"  he  said,  "  and  fie  gee  sone,"  2813 ; 
hold  gee,  2667 ;  talc  yee,  2898 ;  yee  tak  (:  sak),  4799.  The  unin- 
flected form  is  generally  used  when  it  is  immediately  followed 
by  the  pronoun-subject  of  another  verb  :  Lokpai  alle  be  tain,  4896. 
Quite  irregular  is  the  inflection  of  the  second  imperative  in  Bot  gas 
and  fals  yee  him  to  fote,  4733,  where  the  other  manuscripts  have 
the  dissyllabic  forms  falles  orfallep  and  omit  yee. 

The  Surtees  Psalter,     (c.  1300.) 

The  best  of  the  three  manuscripts  containing  the  Surtees  Psalter, 
MS.  Cotton,  Vespasian  D  vn,  has  been  edited  by  J.  Stevenson 
for  the  Surtees  Society 2  and  more  recently  by  C.  Horstman,3  who 

1  As  this  is  the  case  throughout  later  Northern,  the  modals  will  not  hereafter 
be  mentioned. 

2  The  Publications  of  the  Surtees  Society,  1843-1847. 

3  Yorkshire  Writers :  Richard  Eolle  of  Hampole  and  his  Followers,  London,  1896, 
n,  129  ff. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     41 

gives  all  the  variants  of  the  other  two  manuscripts.  According  to 
Horstmau,1  MS.  Vespasian  D  is  not  earlier  than  1350,  although 
the  original  version  may  have  been  written  in  the  preceding  century. 
A  study  of  the  language  of  the  Psalter  has  been  made  by  H. 
Wende,2  who  however  fails  to  record  the  n-forms  of  the  present 
indicative  plural  in  Vespasian  D,  the  most  distinctively  Northern 
of  all  the  manuscripts.  The  first  fifty  Psalms  in  the  edition  of 
Stevenson,  collated  with  that  of  Horstman,  form  the  basis  of  the 
present  investigation. 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  eglien  lokes,  x,  5 ;  hevens  telles,  xvin,  2. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  fele  sais,  m,  3 ;  many  .  .  .  sais,  iv,  6. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :   Ye  ere  lered  pat  demes  lande,  n, 
10  ;  pai  pat  droves,  m,  2  ;  al  pat  wirlces,  v,  7  ;  VI,  9  ;  xin,  4 ;  al 
pat  him  sekes,  xxi,  27  ;  pat  .  .  .  forthbringes  (ipinges),  vm,  8. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  None. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

1.  Noun-subject:  None. 

2.  Demonstrative  pronoun-subject :  pa  hate,  xxiv,  19.     Here 
the  Harleian  MS.  reads  pai  hate,  in  which  the  form  of  the  verb 
is  regular. 

3.  Relative  pronoun -subject :  alle  pat  hope,  v,  12;  pat  love,  v, 
12  ;  Folkepine  pat  leve  in  pe,  xxvii,  9  ;  pai  pat  seke,  xxxix,  15  ; 
whilk  love,  xxxix,  17;  pat  traist  (Horstman,  traiste),  XLVIII,  7. 
Such  a  large  number  of  indicative  plurals  in  -e  with  a  relative 
pronoun-subject  suggests  strong  Midland  influence.     The  scribe 
that  was  responsible  for  the  Midland  forms  given  in  the  next 
section  could  easily  have  altered  these  endings  from  -es  to  -e. 

1  Horstman  says  (pp.  129-130) :  '  Stevenson  places  MS.  Vesp.  in  the  middle  of 
Edward  IPs  reign ;  this  is  a  mistake,  the  MS.  is  not  earlier  than  1350,  and  the 
two  other  MSS.  are  still  later.    Nevertheless,  language  and  style,  and  the  com- 
parative rarity  of  French  terms,  give  the  impression  of  antiquity.     All  the  MSS. 
are  Yorkshire  :  MS.  Vesp.  seems  to  belong  to  the  neighbourhood  of  R.  Rolle.  .  .  . 
R.  Rolle  died  in  1349  an  old  man,  and  his  early  life  belongs  to  the  13th  century. 
The  metrical  Psalter  might  well  be  a  work  of  his  youth,  his  first  attempt.    The 
question  is  one  of  difficulty,  and  I  cannot  now  attempt  to  solve  it.' 

2  Ueberlieferung  und  Sprache  der  mittelenglischen  Version  des  Psalters  und  ihr  Ver- 
hdltnis  zur  lateinischen  Vorlage,  Breslau,  1884. 

4 


42     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

However,  one  can  not  hold  the  scribe  accountable  for  Wordes  of 
his  mouthepat  ga  (:  als  swa),  xxxv,  4. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  pal  knawe,  xm,  4 ;  pai  wane, 
xxxvi,  20 ;  we  here  XLVII,  9 ;  we  calle  (:  of  alle),  xvii,  32 ;  pai 
sai  (:  night  and  dai),  xxxix,  17 ;  whi  love  yhe,  TV,  3 ;  hou  sai  ye, 
x,  2  ;  mikil  we,  x,  5 ;  se  we,  XLVII,  9. 

C.    Endings  in  -n. 

The  following  Midland  forms  are  found  in  the  present  indica- 
tive plural :  pat  .  .  .  sayne,  iv,  5 ;  pat  forthgone  (perambulant), 
VIII,  9 ;  pat  wilen,  xxxix,  15;  pai  sain,  XLI,  11 ;  and  alle  pat 
erden,  XLVIII,  2. 

In  the  case  of  the  sustantive  verb,  be(ri)  is  frequently  used  in  the 
present  indicative :  pai  be  (:  me),  xvii,  37 ;  xxxvii,  20 ;  pat  .  .  . 
be  (:pe),  xxxix,  17  ;  pai  .  .  .  bene  (:  bi-dene),  xxxvi,  20 ;  whereas 
in  the  Cursor  Mundi,  be(n),  if  used  in  the  indicative,  is  restricted 
to  the  future  tense.  There  is  one  instance  of  is  used  as  a  plural  : 
And  ivels  in  paire  hertes  isse  (:  to  neghburgh  hisse),  xxvii,  3. 

The  unconditional  imperative  plural  usually  assumes  the  inflec- 
tion -s :  serves  11,  11  ;  Comes  and  sees,  XLV,  9 ;  Bihaldes  and  sees, 
XLV,  11 ;  but  occasionally  for  the  sake  of  rime  it  may  be  unin- 
flected  :  understande  (:  lande),  n,  10.  When  the  pronominal  sub- 
ject is  expressed,  the  uninflected  form  is  employed :  Singes  til  oure  God, 
singe  yhe,  XLVI,  7 ;  Comes,  sones,  me  yhe  here  (:  sal  lere),  xxxni,  12. 

Richard  Rollers  Pricke  of  Conscience.1     (a.  1349.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :   werkes  for-worthes,   780 ;   eres  waxes,  782 ; 
herbes  .  .  .  bringes,  648 ;  clerkes  .  .  .  bers,  730 ;  eghen  rynnes  (:  he 
bygynnes),  781 ;  tethe  rotes  (:  he  dotes),  785 ;  spirytes  .  .  .  duelles 
(of  angels),  977 ;  clerkes  caldes  (:  pe  les),  1046 ;  many  men  .  .  . 
fr aisles  (:  he  pat  traystes),  1090  ;  clerkes  understandes  (:  twa  handes), 

1257;  acordes  pe  wordex,  1302;  commes  gudes,  1350;  chaunges  pe 
tymes,  1432 ;  says  clerkes,  2350 ;  falles  .  .  .  dayes,  758. 

2.  Adjective  or  demonstrative  pronoun-subject :  many  has,  183  ; 
per  four  lettes,  253  ;  twa  .  .  .  lufes,  1844;  pas  .  .  .  serves,  1081 ; 

1  Ed.  Morris,  The  Philological  Society's  Early  English  Volume,  1862-4.  The  first 
two  thousand  five  hundred  lines  have  been  selected. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     43 

allepir  .  .  .falles,  800 ;  some  .  .  .  kepes  (:  worshepes),  1138 ;  dredes 
ful  many,  1766. 

3.  Eelative  pronoun-subject :  pam  pat  understands  and  knawes, 
203 ;  many  pat  trowes  .  .  .  bot  groches,  303 ;  pat  standes  (:  handes), 
681 ;  (:  landes),  1000  ;  men  pat  par-in  dwelles  (:  elles),  1073  ;  storms 
pat  blawes  (:  wawes),  1217 ;  pa  pat  .  .  .  greves  (:  myscheves),  1564 ; 
pa  pat  duels  (:  angels) ,  2337. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  Eotpaifolow,  ay,  pair  awen  witte 
And  of  noght  elles  thynkes,  ne  tas  Jiede,  274-5  ;  pai  trow  .  .  .  but 
groches,  296 ;  pai  have  .  .  .  bot  forgettes,  2050. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

1.  .Noun-subject : — In  the  first  twenty-five  hundred  lines  there 
are  two  uninflected  plural  indicatives  with  a  noun-subject :  many 
men  se,  1532  and  clerJces  prove  (:  to  lufe),  1087. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  None. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  The  single  occurrence  of  the  unin- 
flected plural  with  a  relative  pronoun,  pat  hold  pases,  1239,  is 
probably  due  to  an  error  in  writing  pat  instead  of  pai.     It  is 
noteworthy  that  at  this  place  three  consecutive  lines  begin  with 
the  relative  pat. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  pai  knaw,  277 ;  pai  trow,  296 ; 
pai  do,  1029 ;  we  lif,  1256 ;  we  wax,  1298  and  2106  ;  yhe  here, 
1303  ;  we  duelle,  1377  ;  we  fande,  1463 ;  pai  life,  1628  ;  pai  gang 
(:  wrang),  193 ;  pai  se  (:  may  be),  297 ;  we  se  (:  vanite],  1178  and 
1516;  we  tyn  (:  pyn),  1457;  we  fail  (:  travail),  1463;  pai  bere 
(:  feblere),  1502;  pai  chese  (:  vanytese),  1583.     Unusually  distant 
from  the  subject  are  the  uninflected  forms  in  When  pai  pis  tretisce 
here  or  rede,  343. 

The  cases  in  which  the  pronoun-subject  follows  the  verb  are  not 
numerous.  They  likewise  unite  in  presenting  the  uninflected  form 
of  the  verb,  the  final  -e  being  without  syllabic  value.  Compare 
haf  we,  1372,  1456,  1459;  se  we,  1444;  and  wyn  we,  2112  with 
fynde  we,  1368  and  lofe  we,  1470. 

There  are  two  instances  of  is  with  a  plural  subject :  maners  pat 
in  the  world  es  (:  unstabilnes),  1657,  and^>a£  .  .  .  es  (:  wrechednes), 
1169.  In  this  connection  it  may  be  noted  that  was  is  used  with  a 
plural  subject  in  als  alle  my  faders  was  (:  sal  pas),  1386. 


44     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

Richard  Rolle's  Prose  Treatises.^     (a.  1349.) 

A.  Endjngs  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  angells  gernys,  4,  2  ;  astronomyenes  by-haldes, 
9,  24;  ypocrittes  takes,  10,  18;  bedells  and  foresters  duse,  11,  20; 
ihynges  makes,  13,  10  and  20  ;  takes  false  crystyn  mene,  10,  13  ; 
sprynges  err  ours,  17,  31. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  pay  pat  drynkes,  3,  31 ;  ihay  pat 
files  4,  18 ;  men  pat  lufes,  8,  7  ;  deuells  pat  efforces,  8,  18  ;  pat  .  .  . 
delyttes,  9,  5. 

3.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  thay  flye  .  .  .  and  rystes,  9,  2 ; 
pay  hafe  .  .  .  and  fastes  and  wakes  and  semes,  9,  12;  we  ere  dis- 
posede  and  hose,  35,  13;  pay  fall  sumtyme  and  brekes,  39,  19. 

B.  Uninflected  forms : 

pay  fynd,  4,  25  ;  pay  say,  9,  26  ;  we  honour,  10,  17  ;  pay  come 
and  gaa,  9,  7 ;  pay  saye,  9,  25 ;  we  calle,  1,  9 ;  ge  trauelle,  4,  16 ; 
pay  halde,  8,  11. 

Similar  to  ic  .  .  .  hcefis,  Lindisfarne  Matthew,  vin,  9  is  when  I 
here  thaym  or  redis  pam,  43,  19  ;  but  in  this  case  a  personal  pro- 
noun, and  not  a  noun,  intervenes  to  cause  the  assumption  of  the 
inflected  form. 

North  English  Legends.2     (1300-1350.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  palmers  walkes,  I,  427  ;  al  men  says,  vn,  228  ; 
wurdes  proves,  x,  84;  answers  turmentes,  x,  168;  clerkis  has  told, 
XIV,  145;   all  pe  pople  .  .  .  loues,  n,  194;  our e  four e  bodis  lies 
(:  wise),  VI,  320 ;  men  and  wemen  standes  (:  seruandes),  viit  200 ; 
lessons  unto  us  lers  (:  maners)  n,  18. 

2.  Indefinite  adjective-subject:   sum  sais,  vi,  173;    xiu,  173 
and  174. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :   deuils  pat  ledis,  I,  34  ;  pam  pat 
kepis,  I,  362;  who  kepis,  ill,  131 ;  al  po  pat  passes,  vi,  18,  thinges 
pat  .  .  .  has  bene,  xiv,  176  ;  Maysters pat  .  .  .  mase  (:  rase,  pret. 
pi.),  VI,  74;  al  men  pat  .  .  .  hase  (-.place),  VII,  280. 

1  Ed.  G.  Perry,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  20. 

2  C.  Horstmann,  Altenglische  Legenden :  7,  Die  Nordenylische  Legendensammlung, 
Heilbronn,  1881.     The  first  fourteen  legends  have  been  selected. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.    45 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  How  ge  er  bliih,  and  euir  has  bene, 
I,  361 ;  pai  hold  noghtfre  bot  castes,  vii,  280. 

5.  Noun  and  personal  pronoun  used  conjointly  as  subject :  Saynt 
Steuen  and  I  ligges  euyn  mete,  vi,  275. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

1.  Personal   pronoun-subject. — (a)  Pronoun  -j-  verb :  ge  call, 
n,  155 ;  pai  wirk,  vi,  186  ;  ge  get,  vii,  168 ;  pai  ask,  xiv,  165 ; 
ge  by/ore  haf,  vii,  233 ;  pai  say  (:  night  and  day),  1, 197  ;  pai  dwell 
('fell),  in,  27  ;  we  ken  (:  men),  vii,  165  ;  ge  stand  (:  land),  vii,  231 ; 
pai  tell  (:  fell),  x,  255 ;  ge  on  call  (:  ouer-all),  I,  39 ;  ge  now  se 
(:  degre),  I,  329. 

There  are  numerous  cases  of  silent  final  -e  used  to  indicate  the 
length  of  a  preceding  vowel  or  to  support  certain  consonants :  pe 
gudes  pat  ge  haue  tane  with  trayne,  n,  452 ;  When  pai  here  me  neuin 
Cristes  name,  x,  100 ;  Unto  pai  come  to  pat  cuntre,  IV,  32  ;  we  rede 
(:  gun  lede),  I,  279 ;  pai  rede  (:  takes  hede),  in,  20 ;  ge  forsake 
(:  take),  vii,  152 ;  we  pus  writenfnde  (:  in  mynde),  n,  90. 

(b)  Verb  -f-  pronoun  :  find  we,  II,  7 ;  say  pai,  vii,  91  ;  do  ge, 
Vii,  141 ;  haf  pai,  vii,  230 ;  haue  pai,  vii,  218  and  525 ;  loue  pai, 
Vii,  353. 

2.  Noun-subject : — There  are  four  instances  of  the  uninflected 
verb  used  with  a  noun-subject,  a  number  larger  than  is  usually 
found  in  other  Northern  texts  of  the  same  length.     They  are  als 
sum  laude  men  haue  said  biforn,  VI,  6  ;  youre  hetinges  waste,  x,  38  ; 
als  clerkes  knawe  (:  lawe),  v,  3 ;  and  als  clerkes  rede  (:  wikked  dede), 
vi,  171. 

The  imperative  plural  has  the  s-form  when  the  subject-pronoun 
is  not  expressed :  Festes  him  .  .  .  Bot  bindes  him,  I,  113;  Wendis 
ogayn  .  .  .  And  lettes  me  noght,  I,  137;  Gose,  ledes  hir,  I,  309 ; 
otherwise  the  uninflected  form  is  normally  employed  :  Haue  ge  no 
thoght,  in,  125;  no  lenger  ge  stand  (:  land),  vii,  231.  The  unin- 
flected form  may  also  be  used  if  a  reflexive  pronoun-object  comes 
immediately  after  the  verb  :  "  Goes  to  the  wod  and  get  gow  wandes 
And  bring  pam  home  bunden  in  bandes  !  And  gose  to  grauell  biside 
pe  se  And  many  stones  bring es  unto  me!"  vii,  213—216.  The 
plural  form  is  occasionally  used  when  only  one  person  is  addressed  : 
"  Damysell,  pat  can  ge  best  do.  Says,  what  ge  will  to  him  in  hy  !  " 


46     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

i,  432,  and  Saynt  Lucy  said :  "  Moder,  takes  hede  And  trewly  trous 
pispatpai  rede"  in,  19-20. 

Twain  and  Gawain.1    (1300-1350.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  wordes  greves,  508  ;  maidens  .  .  .  has,  3349  ; 
His  men  .  .  .  has  .  .  .  ondfindes,  1655. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  pam  pat  herkyns,  4 ;  pam  pat  sais, 
968  ;  maidens  pat  wirkes,  2992  ;  knyghtes  pat  langes,  3471 ;  we  pat 
here  suffers,  3044. 

3.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  Whils  ge  it  have  and  thinkes  on  me, 
1530  and  1538. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  +  verb  :  we  wirk,  305 ;  we  hald,  1246  ; 
we  luf,  2252;  ge  luf,  1505;  ge  ask,  1526;  ge  mak,  2245;  ge  ga, 
3007;  ge  gif,  3293;  pai  cum,  311;  pai  say,  1264;  pai  dwell 
(:  omell),  1435 ;  ge  knaw  (:  thraw),  2362 ;  ge  understand  (:  land), 
2665.  Supporting  final  -e  is  frequently  written  :  pare/ore  pai  hate 
me  to  pe  ded,  2162 ;  Oft  pai  bete  us  wonder  sare,  3060 ;  ge  mende 
(:  ende),  1513  and  2363 ;  pai  him  here  (:  manere),  302. 

(6)  Verb  -{-  personal  pronoun  :  cum  pai,  303  ;  hald  ge,  1232 ; 
bicalpai,  2157;  seke  pai,  769;  have  ge,  1055. 

Because  of  the  requirement  of  rime,  the  verb  assumes  the  unin- 
flected  form  with  a  noun-subject  in  pe  fendes  lyf  (:  gyf),  3040. 
The  uninflected  plural  also  occurs  once  with  a  pronoun  and  a  noun 
used  conjointly  as  subject:  He  and  his  menge  ha  thoght,  1215. 
There  are  two  instances  of  is  used  with  a  plural  subject :  hyr  willes 
es  (:  maystres),  935  and  es  noght  swilk  twa,  3590. 

The  unconditioned  imperative  plural  normally  requires  the  end- 
ing -es  :  understandes  (:  tithandes),  139  ;  (:  landes),  1519  ;  Takes  pe 
beste  and  bindes  him  fast,  3178.  The  uninflected  form  is  used  not 
only  when  the  pronominal  subject  is  in  close  contact  with  the  verb 
but  also  when  it  is  unexpressed,  if  the  reflexive  object  is  used  as  an 
exponent  of  the  verb-form  :  Avise  gow  wele,  1511.  The  uninflected 
plural  may  also  be  used  if  the  form  of  the  verb  is  made  manifest 
by  a  following  pronoun  used  as  the  subject  of  a  dependent  verb  ; 

1  Ed.  G.  Schleich,  Oppeln  und  Leipzig,  1887. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     47 

Luke  ge  cum,  1514.  The  frequent  use  of  the  s-form  when  only 
one  person  is  addressed  may  sometimes  be  explained  as  the  employ- 
ment of  the  pluralis  majestatis,  as  Takes,  88  and  Cumandes,  123 
(both  when  Kay  is  addressing  the  Queen)  and  Lates  him,  507  (in 
Y  wain's  address  to  the  Queen).  But  the  occurrence  of  inflected 
and  uninflected  forms  in  the  same  speech — lat  be,  942  and  takes 
tent,  951 ;  dwells,  2361  and  socore,  2363 ;  Gifes  dome  and  lates  us 
wend,  3428  and  Gifes  gowre  dome  and  lat  us  ga,  3442 — are  to  be 
brought  into  connection  with  the  interchange  of  pou  and  ge  (gow  : 
now,  3294;  peifre,  3299),  which  is  not  always  rational.1 

Lawrence  Minot's  Poems.2    (c.  1342.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  goure  harmes  cumes,  vi,  43  ;  pe  wordes  of  sir 
Edward  makes,  v,  3 ;  pe  Franche  men  er  .  .  .  And  mase,  vm,  34. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  sum  ligges,  in,  99  ;  sais  all,  v,  88. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  deds  pat  dose  me  dere,  I,  10. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

1 .  Personal  pronoun-subject :  pai  sail,  x,  4 ;   we  knaw  (:  law), 
Vii,  125 ;  we  bigin,  (:  gyn),  vii,  152 ;  als  we  wele  ken  (:  Amen),  v, 
87  ;  For  pai  haue  failed  of  pair e  pray,  I,  38  ;  paifede,  x,  5  ;  cri 
pai,  I,  69  ;  find  ge,  vi,  19  ;  get  ge,  vm,  3  ;  think  pai,  vm,  36  ;  haue 
pai,  i,  51  ;  leue  ge,  vi,  22. 

2.  Noun-subject : — There  are  two  instances  of  the  uninflected 
plural  with  a  noun  subject :  fir  galaymen  haue  wroght,  in,  20,  and 
kinges  .  .  .  call  (:  in  pall),  vii,  112. 

The  only  occurrence  of  the  inflection  -en  is  in  Whare  pi  felaws 
lien  and  gapin  (:  with  pi  wapin),  vii,  135. 

The  Lay  Folks'  Catechism?     (c.  1350.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:'  hali  saules  has,  19;  clerkes  techis  and  shewes, 
79  ;  spices  springes  and  spredes,  473;  dedis  .  .  .  shewes,  36  ^falles 
four  thinges,  282 ;  comes  .  .  .  spices,  466. 

1  See  Schleich's  remark  on  1.  86. 

2  Ed.  W.  Scholle,  Quelten  und  Forschungen,  LIT. 
3 Ed.  Simmons  and  Nolloth,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  118. 


48     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

2.  Adjective-subject :   twa  lies,  274 ;   thre  first  teches,  383 ;    al 
othir  comes,  453;  thre  .  .  .  clenses,  315. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  al  creatures  that  loues,  30  ;  all  that 
haves,  60 ;  tham  that  .  .  .  tas,  337. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject;   Als  we  sklaundir  or  backbite  or 
falsly  defames,  Or  fandes,  210;  we  gete,  or  tas,  244;  we  will  noght 
do  .  .  .  Bot  anely  haldes,  521. 

B.     Uninflected  forms : 

we  sla,  209 ;  we  do,  261 ;  we  think,  267 ;  we  haf,  312  and  313 ; 
we  have,  311 ;  we  bere,  23 ;  thai  come,  68  ;  we  loue,  265 ;  thai  gastely 
sla,  455. 

There  is  one  instance  of  is  with  a  plural  subject :  And  in  this 
commandement  isforboden  us  Alkyns  mysbileues,  175. 

The  York  Plays}     (c.  1430-1440.) 2 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :    wordis   makis  .  .  .  and   chaunges,  x,  275 ; 
myses  bytis,  XI,  274;  beestis  lyes,  xi,  295;  all  pepul  prayes  (:  all 
weyes),  X,  182;  comes  .  .  .  cares,  ix,  9. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject:  po  pat  lykys,  n,  11 ;  vertues  pat 
longes,  v,  48  ;  we  that  haues,  v,  164;  Jewes  pat  wonnes,  xi,  31  and 
161 ;  loppis  that  .  .  .  makis,  xr,  294. 

3.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  ge  wax  .  .  .  and  growes,  n,  84 ; 
we  .  .  .  hose,  x,  357.     The  irregular  you  eates,  iv,  57  is  probably 
an  error  for  pou  eates ;    compare  Thowe  speydes  in  the  next  line. 
Likewise  abnormal  is  the  ending  -s  in  Why  crys  you  swa  f  xi,  257, 
which  has  a  parallel  in  the  imperative  Takis  ge  entent,  ix,  46. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  -j-  verb  :  ghe  ly,  I,  115  and  118  ;  pai  assent, 
n,  5 :  we  neyd,  iv,  39 ;  ye  speyd,  iv,  89 ;  we  on  call  (:  shall),  iv, 
49 ;  ye  ga  (:fra,  twa,  wa),  vi,  19 ;  ye  go  (:  wo),  vi,  55 ;  (:  my  to), 
VII,  81 ;  we  pray  (:  pat  maye),  ix,  164  ;  we  kenn  (:  ten,  Jessen,  men), 

1  Ed.  Lucy  Toulmin  Smith,  Oxford,  1885.     Twelve  plays  have  been  chosen  for 
study. 

2  Although  the  plays  were  probably  composed  about  1340-1350,  the  manuscript 
dates  approximately  from  1430-1440. — Miss  Smith's  Introduction,  p.  xviii  and  p. 
xlv. 


f   UN' 

v& 

Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     49 

XI,  49 ;  they  ken  (:  Jessen),  xi,  323  ;  pei  in  dwell  (:  Israeli),  xi,  186  ; 
we  z0efe  warrand  (ifande,  third  pret.  sg.),  xi,  221. 

Silent  -e  is  frequently  written  as  a  supporting  vowel,  even  though 
it  may  be  altogether  unnecessary  :  And  sen  pai  wrange  haue  wroght, 
II,  7 ;  We  love  the,  mooste  of  myght,  iv,  48  ;  Looke  that  ye  doe  as  ye 
haue  sayd,  TV,  80 ;  we  wirke,  ix,  300 ;  pei  mene,  x,  1 21 ;  we  come, 
x,  150;  we  bonne,  xi,  257;  pay  fele,  xi,  275;  we  graunte,  xi, 
353;  ge  sitte  (:  gitt],  ix,  184;  we  wende  (:  is  sende),  vi,  168;  we 
warande  (ifande,  lande,  thowsande),  xi,  54. 

(6)  Verb  -f-  personal  pronoun :  w%  ea£  ye  noght?  v,  29 ;  .How 
do  ZAm/f  xi,  321 ;  fare  we,  IV,  64;  gette  wee,  x,  166  ;  sitte  they, 
xi,  325. 

There  is  one  instance  of  the  irregular  use  of  the  uninflected  verb 
with  a  noun-subject :  leues  last,  xi,  102 ;  and  also  one  case  of  -en 
in  the  indicative  plural :  Jewes  .  .  .  faren,  xi,  303.  The  unin- 
flected form  in  all  that  me  wyrschippe  sail  wone  here,  I,  137  is  an 
error  probably  due  to  the  dropping  of  -s  before  the  initial  -s  of  sail. 

The  extension  of  -s  to  the  first  singular  occurs  when  the  verb  is 
at  a  distance  from  its  subject,  as  in  I  with  my  worde  hase  wrothe,  II, 
80.  Through  analogy  with  the  s-plurals,  is  as  well  as  ar  may  be 
used  with  a  plural  subject :  In  erthe  is  trees,  in,  9 ;  all  thynges  is 
mayd,  iv,  60 ;  dayntys  that  is,  iv,  97. 

The  imperative  plural  has,  as  a  rule,  the  ending  -s  when  the 
subject-pronoun  is  not  in  immediate  contact  with  the  verb :  helpes, 
XI,  81 ;  Beeths,  XI,  197 ;  comes  forth  ge  two,  m,  94;  Wendes  and 
spers  youre  dores,  ix,  161  ;  Lovis  me  for-thy  and  loues  me  aye,  in, 
36 ;  Beis  .  .  .  comes  .  .  .  Haves,  xi,  367.  The  uninflected  plural 
which,  with  the  exception  of  Takis  ge,  ix,  46,  is  everywhere  used 
when  the  subject-pronoun  is  postpositive — Goo  yhe,  v,  173;  wytt 
ye,  vi,  15;  bide  ge,  x,  145 — has  been  extended  to  cases  where  this 
is  replaced  by  the  reflexive  object-pronoun  :  mayke  you,  iv,  55 ; 
holde  yow,  n,  29.  The  uninflected  form  is  likewise  frequently  used 
when  the  imperative  is  followed  by  the  pronominal  subject  of  a 
dependent  verb :  Looke  that  ye  bothe  saue  and  sett,  iv,  24 ;  Looke 
that  ye  do,  iv,  80 ;  Dwell  here  yf  that  ye  canne,  iv,  29.  From 
instances  like  the  last  it  was  but  a  step  to  the  use  of  the  uninflected 
plural  dissociated  from  the  idea  of  a  pronominal  subject  or  object 
expressed  in  the  same  clause.  Thus  we  have  kepe,  iv,  91  and  x, 
5 


50     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

149 ;  Love  .  .  .  harken  .  .  .  do,  iv,  50 ;  and  Alle  creatures  to  me 
take  tent,  vi,  1.  However,  the  number  of  uninflected  plurals  in 
such  cases  as  these  is,  in  the  York  Plays,  far  exceeded  by  the  full 
inflections  in  -s. 

The  Towneley  Plays.1     (1350-1450.) 2 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  tythyngys  mekyll  amendys,  ix,  149;  men  .  .  . 
blowys  (:  lawes),  ix,  94. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  all  trowes,  vii,  10  ;  all  bowys,  ix,  20. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  ye  all  that  standys,  1, 157  ;  all  that 
beris,  in,  105 ;  showers  that  renys,  in,  351 ;  that  lofys,  vi,  142. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  -f-  verb :   we  call,  I,  25 ;   ye  wax,  I,  191 ; 
we  thank,  I,  208  ;  thay  incres,  vin,  53 ;  thai  leyf,  vin,  350 ;  ye  luf, 
IX,  133 ;  thay  ryn  (:  in),  in,  357 ;  we  trus  (:  us),  vii,  152 ;  we  ken 
(:  ten,  men),  vin,  53;  thay  dwell  (:  emell),  vin,  199;   ye  .  .  .  ken 
(:  men),  11,  16;   we  .  .  .  call  (:  I  shall),  IV,  2 ;  ye    .    .    .   gang 
(:  lang),  xi,  11. 

Silent  final  -e  is  frequently  written :  We  lofe  the,  lord,  with  all 
oure  thoght,  I,  75 ;  here  ar  well  moo  then  we  have  seen,  I,  237  ;  thay 
multiplye,  vm,  37 ;  we  fare,  vin,  305  ;  we  drowne  (:  bowne,  downe), 
Viii,  414. 

(b)  Verb  +  personal  pronoun  :   get  we,  II,  82 ;   Why  cry  ye  so  f 
Vin,  270 ;  how  do  thay,  vin,  333 ;  haue  we,  1, 151  ;  how  fayre  ye? 
m,  190. 

Strongly  suggestive  of  Midland  influence  is  the  large  number  of 
uninflected  plurals  used  with  a  noun  or  relative  pronoun :  elders 
haue,  11,  101 ;  prayers  haue,  iv,  66 ;  mystis  .  .  .  byte,  vin,  287 ; 
folk  haue,  vin,  313 ;  Jues  .  .  .  fayre,  vin,  315  ;  floures  that  smell? 
I,  239 ;  all  that  wyrk,  n,  70 ;  that  make,  vin,  34 ;  Jues  that  won, 
Viii,  35;  that  kepe,  viii,  62;  we  that  .  .  .  haue,  I,  251.  The 
Midland  -en  occurs  once  :  whits  that  ye  liffen  (:  has  giffen),  n,  447, 

1Ed.  G.  England,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  Extra  Series,  LXXI.  Eleven  plays  have  been 
selected. 

a  Ten  Brink  (n,  266)  assigns  the  manuscript  to  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth 
century. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     51 

as  does  also  the  ending  -th  :  thise  tythyngys  doth,  ix,  168.  There 
is  one  case  of  -th  in  the  first  singular :  I  .  .  .  hath,  x,  2,  and  one 
instance  of  is  used  with  a  plural  subject :  Greatte  mystis,  sir,  ther 
is,  vin,  286. 

Also  in  the  inflection  of  the  imperative  plural  a  divergence  from 
the  usage  of  the  York  Plays  is  noticed.  In  the  York  Plays  the 
unconditioned  plural  normally  assumes  the  ending  -s,  but  in  the 
Toivneley  Plays  the  uninflected  forms  are  almost  exclusively  used  : 
herkyn,  vn,  2  and  91 ;  browke,  II,  447;  hold,  vi,  131  ;  heyf,  VIII, 
41 2  ;  blyn  (:  wytt  you  wyri),  vm,  210, — twenty-three  in  all.  The 
s-plural  is  used  only  twice :  herkyns,  I,  260  and  vn,  31. 

Wyntoun's  Orygynale  Cronykil.1     (c.  1420.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:    ryvarys  ragys,  i,   963;    steddys  growys,  I, 
1344;    hyrdys  hydys,  I,  1 350 ;  pylgrymys  mais,  II,  1672;    yheris 
hapnys,  in,  662  ;  mudrys  .  .  .  berys,  I,  702  ;  landys  lyis  (:  Tessalyis), 
II,  1234  ;  (:  Paradys),  I,  544 ;  autoris  .  .  .  sayis  (:  wayis),  II,  842 ; 
cymmys  fludis,  I,  129 ;  lyis  the  landys,  I,  1067. 

2.  Indefinite  adjective-  or  demonstrative  pronoun-subject :  syndry 
haldys,  I,  309 ;  sum  oysis,  I,  1091 ;  thir  lyis,  I,  1198. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  us  that  lywys,  I,  708  ;  watterys  that 
cummys,  I,  924  ;    quha  passys,  I,  946  ;   quha  sekys,  I,  1006  ;   Thai 
that  hafys  thaire  mater e,  Or  felys,  II,  612. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  .  .  .  reknys,  I,  300 ;  thai  .  .  . 
has,  I,  817 ;    thai  .  .  .  sayis,  n,  800.     The  inflected  form  when 
the  verb  is  in  direct  contact  with  the  subject  occurs  twice :   thai 
oysis,  i,  665,  and  thai  spekys,  u,  857.     The  irregularity  of  this 
usage  is  shown  by  the  normal  thai  oys,  I,  661, 1167, 1265,  n,  797 ; 
we  oys,  i,  1217,  1328,  1682,  1714,  n,  768;  and  we  ws,  u,  765. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Pronoun  -f-'verb:  we  fynd,  I,  55 ;  thai  tak,  I,  154;  we  call, 
i,  388 ;  thai  ly,  I,  1192 ;  yhe  ga,  n,  866  ;  thai  say  (:  day),  n,  373 ; 
thai  bere  and  get  (:  but  let],  I,  652  ;  thai  ly  (:  lychtly),  1, 1411 ;  we  ta 

1Ed.  David   Laing,  The  Historians  of  Scotland,  vols.  n,  in,  ix,  Edinburgh, 
1872-79.     The  first  three  books  form  the  basis  of  the  present  investigation. 


52     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

(:  alsua),  VII,  523.  Silent  -e  is  frequently  written,  usually  to  indi- 
cate the  length  of  the  preceding  vowel :  yhe  here,  L,  782  ;  we  halde, 
I,  1404;  we  fynde,  I,  1736  ;  thai  halde  and  hawe  (:  gawe,  preterit 
singular),  I,  88 ;  yhe  crepe  (:  kepe),  ill,  876. 

(b)  Verb  -f  pronoun  :  hawe  yhe,  I,  1103 ;  calle  we,  I,  1246  ;  mak 
thai,  II,  1157. 

The  unconditional  imperative  plural  requires,  as  a  rule,  the  form 
in  -s,  but  uninflected  forms  are  also  occasionally  found. 

Gilbert  of  the  Haye's  The  Buke  of  the  Law  of  Armys,  or  Buke 
of  Bataillis.1     (1456.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  treis  has,  9,  14;  clerkis  cattis,  12,  36;  seven 
angelis  betakenis,  15,  11;  wateris  gerris,  20,  24 ;  hony  beis  cum- 
mys  .  .  .  and  takis,  20,  18 ;  departis  all  othir  wateris,  12,  24. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject:  the  quhilkis  tynis,   16,   27;  that 
pertenis,  33,  14;  quhilkis  traistis  .  .  .  bot  has  .  .  .  bot  lyvis,  16,  26 ; 
that  .  .  .  has,  7,  10;  namys  that  eftir  cummys,  16,  9. 

B.  Uninflected  forms  : — we  see,  5,  3  ;  thai  understand,  9, 1 ;  thai 
syn,  16,  30;  thai  do,  30,  33;  thai  touch,  33,  27;  ge  have,  13,  28 ; 
thai  ressave,  30,  9. 

There  are  numerous  instances  of  is  used  as  a  plural.  In  the 
majority  of  cases  the  subject  follows  the  verb,  the  tendency  being 
to  use  ar  when  the  subject  precedes.  This  distinction  is  illustrated 
by  is  understandin  the  symple  peple  that  ar,  30,  22.  Both  nouns 
and  relative  pronouns  may  be  used  as  the  subject  of  is  :  thre 
maneris  .  .  .  is,  25,  30 ;  the  weris  that  is,  7,  7. 

A  similar  tendency  is  observable  in  the  case  of  the  expletive  use 
of  was  with  a  plural  subject,  which  has  also  been  extended  to  cases 
where  the  subject  precedes :  Apostolis  was  8,  17 ;  thame  that  wasf 
7,  15. 

There  are  two  instances  of  the  apparent  extension  of  the  inflec- 
tion -s  to  the  infinitive :  And  as  to  the  see  agayne  passis  all  wateris, 
sa  dois  all  sciencis  in  this  warld  redoundis  agayne  to  holy  scripture, 
12,  24  ;  And  rycht  sa  dois  the  fals  opyniouns  of  herisy  makis  the 

1  Ed.  J.  H.  Stevenson,  8.  T.  S.,  1901.  The  First  Part  has  been  chosen  for 
study. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     53 

holy  scripture  sa  bitter,  20,  20.  Since  these  are  the  only  cases  of 
this  kind  and  both  occur  with  dois,  it  is  probable  that  redoundis 
and  makis  were  felt  as  finite  verbs  and  not  as  infinitives.  In  these 
two  parallel  constructions,  dois  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  an 
emphatic  auxiliary  but,  in  connection  with  the  adverb  of  manner 
sa,  is  to  be  considered  as  anticipatory  of  the  action  of  the  real  verb. 

Barbour's  Bruce.1     (c.  1375;  MS.  1487.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  Ynglis  men  has,  iv,  648  ;  all  menfleis,  ix,  90  ; 
His  fay  is  hym  haldis,  vii,  251 ;  flearis  thair  wais  tais  (:  can  chas), 
VI,  436. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  thingis  that  makis,  iv,  533 ;  thame 
that  haldis,  iv,  726 ;  us  that  ydill  lyis,  iv,  345 ;  that  .  .  .  haldis, 
IV,  349. 

3.  Personal    pronoun-subject :  thai  to  mankind  has,  iv,   225 ; 
thai  .  .  .  has,  iv,  365;  VI,  550;  vii,  313;  vin,  478;  thai  .  .  . 
haldis,  iv,  541 ;  thai  .  .  .  makis,  iv,  691.     Unusual  is  the  form 
has  in  contact  with  the  verb :    And  quhen  at  thai  has  seyn  the 
kyng,  vn,  283. 

B.  Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  -f  verb :  thai  mak,  iv,  235  and  528 ;  ghe 
#peir,  iv,  494 ;  ge  knaw,  iv,  520 ;  we  haf,  TV,  532 ;  VI,  541 ;  vii, 
45 ;  thai  ly,  v,  81 ;  vn,  314 ;  we  cum,  vin,  248  ;  ge  chasty  me,  ix, 
742 ;  ge  now  haf,  iv,  652 ;  thai  occupy  (:  mercy),  iv,  524 ;  thai  tell 
(ifell),  vii,  56  ;  thai  ly  (:  halely),  vii,  539  ;  thai  hyde,  iv,  375 ;  thai 
haue,  vii,  265 ;  we  drede,  vn,  444. 

(6)  Verb  -f-  personal  pronoun  :  call  thai,  iv,  205 ;  sa  ghe,  vn, 
258  ;  trow  ge,  ix,  82  ;  think  ge,  ix,  228  ;  hafpai,  ix,  717. 

The  imperative  plural  usually  requires  the  inflected  form  when 
the  pronominal  subject  is  not  in  close  contact  with  the  verb  :  hangis 
and  drawis!  iv,  322;  haldis,  vn,  123;  thinkis,  vm,  253;  but 
abide  ghe  heir,  vn,  10.  The  uninflected  form  may  furthermore  be 

1  Ed.  Skeat,  S.  T.  S.,  1893-1895.  The  best  manuscript  is  the  one  in  St.  John's 
College,  Cambridge,  which  begins  at  line  57  of  Book  iv. — Skeat's  Preface,  p. 
Ixix.  I  have  selected  a  passage  running  from  Book  iv,  line  57  to  Book  ix  in- 
clusive. 


54     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

used  with  a  postpositive  reflexive  object :  mak  gow  gair,  iv,  626, 
and  has  also  extended  itself  to  many  plurals  the  subjects  of  which 
are  remote  or  unexpressed :  Bot  haf  ghe  hardyment,  cum  ner  .  .  . 
Wyn  me,  vn,  439. 

In  the  part  of  the  Bruce  quoted  in  Wyntoun's  Cronyldl  (printed 
by  Skeat,  p.  xciii  ff.),  only  the  following  present  indicative  plurals 
occur  :  Wys  men  sayis,  210  ;  That  .  .  .  afferis,  2678  ;  Thai  sla  .  .  . 
And  haldis,  2775 ;  yhe  hawe,  2782. 

Eobert  Henryson's  Poems.1     (c.  1475-1500.) 

The  poems  selected  are  Orpheus  and  Eurydice  (O),  The  Lyoun 
and  the  Mous  (L),  Robene  and  Makyne  (R),  and  The  Bludy  Serk  (8). 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  deidis  fattiSj  0,  513;  scheip  gois,  R,  30;  men 
cumis,  8,  78. 

2.  Adjective-subject :  thir  ihre  turnis,  0,  483  ;  mony  fallis,  609. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  thame  Quhilk  .  .  .  havis,  L,  181. 

B.  Uninflected  forms  : — 

we  flee,  0,  438  ;  we  cast,  453  ;  we  call,  462 ;  thai  incur,  548  ;  we 
tak  (:  wrak),  458 ;  we  rede,  477 ;  ye  knaw,  L,  71 ;  ye  haif,  165 ; 
thay  se,  184;  thay  dreid,  185;  haif  ye,  80. 

The  imperative  plural  is  uninflected  whether  the  pronominal 
subject  is  expressed  or  not :  Cum  help,  cum  help,  L,  147  ;  Go,  louse 
him  sone,  154;  Tak  ye  .  .  .  And  hing,  8,  76  ;  Think,  120. 

Intrusion  of  -s  into  the  first  singular  is  seen  in  Now  am  I  tane 
.  .  .  and  traistis,  L,  20  and  I  knaw,  Bot  keipis,  R,  11. 

Dunbar's  The  Tua  Mariit  Wemen  and  the  Wedo.2     (a.  1503.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject :  Birdis  hes,  60 ;  women  has  and  .  .  .  convoyis, 
453 ;  frendis  .  .  .  behaldis,  436 ;  glowis  my  chaftis,  1 08 ;  wateris 
myn  ene,  and  welteris  doune  teris,  439  ;  dois  thir  damysellis,  457. 

2.  Indefinite  adjective-subject:  Sum  rownis ;  and  sum  ralgeis ; 
and  sum  redis  ballatis,  480. 

xEd.  David  Laing,  Edinburgh,  1865. 

2  Ed.  John  Small,  The  Poems  of  William  Dunbar,  S.  T.  S.,  1884-93. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     55 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  hairteis  that  stryveis,  59  ;  that  sittis, 
440;  that  .  .  .  ioyis  .  .  .  andfangis  .  .  .  and  lattis,  62 ;  that  .  .  . 
haldis  .  .  .  et  delis,  458. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  ge  gour  fayth  hes,  45. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  -f  verb :  ge  call,  50 ;  ge  speir,  52 ;  thai 
pleis,  63;  thai  lak,  67 ;  ge  speik,  205;  we  set,  449  ;  we  dule,  450; 
ge  so  blist  call,  235. 

(6)  Verb  -f  personal  pronoun  :  think  ge,  47  ;  haif  ge,  153  ;  sleip 
ge,  221 ;  say  thai,  440  ;  se  ge,  440. 

Throughout  this  poem  the  imperative  plural  is  uninflected  both 
when  the  subject-pronoun  is  used  :  ge  lyth  and  leir,  257,  and  when 
it  is  omitted :  be  constant  .  .  .  and  counterfeit,  259 ;  Lady  is,  leir 
thir  lessonis  et  be,  503. 

Most  of  the  narrative  is  in  the  first  person,  and  as  a  consequence 
there  are  eleven  cases  of  -s  in  the  first  singular.  In  one  of  these 
the  pronoun  is  in  direct  contact  with  the  verb :  I  murdris,  212, 
which  should  be  compared  with  Imus[e]  .  .  .  and  murnys,  211-212. 

In  the  poem  beginning  with  We  Lordis  hes  chosin  a  chiftane 
mervellus,  the  first  line  illustrates  the  influence  which  a  noun  in 
apposition  with  a  personal  pronoun-subject  may  have  on  the  form 
of  the  verb  that  follows.  The  imperative  Gladethe  thoue  Queyne 
of  Scottis  regioun  shows  the  influence  of  Southern  literary  models 
and  illustrates  the  incongruity  in  the  choice  of  forms  that  frequently 
attends  such  borrowing. 

The  New  Testament  in  Scots.— St.  Luke.1     (c.  1520.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  myn  een  has  sene,  u,  30;  synnaris  luvis,  vi, 
32  ;  foxis  has,  ix,  58  ;  thouchtis  cummis,  xxrv,  38  ;  discipilis  .  .  . 
fastis  oft  and  makis,  v,  33 ;  castis  out  your  sonnis,  XI,  19. 

2.  Indefinite  adjective  or  demonstrative  or  possessive  pronoun- 
subject :   thin  [thine]  etis  and  drinkis,  v,  33;   thir  has,  vm,  13; 
vtheris  sais,  IX,  29  ;  mony  seekis,  xin,  24. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  thame  that  sittes,  I,  79  ;  riche  men 
that  has  your  confort,  vi,  24 ;  thir  that  heres,  viu,  12  ;  een  that  seis, 

1  Ed.  T.  G.  Law,  S.  T.  S.,  1901. 


56     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

x,  23  ;   Ye  it  ar  that  justifies  you,  xvi,  15  ;  ye  it  ar  that  has  duellit, 
xxn,  28 ;  that  .  .  .  luves,  xx,  46. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  Thai  that  ar  hale  has,  v,  31 ; 
ye  .  .  .  dais,  VI,  46 ;  thai  ga  .  .  .  and  bringis,  vm,  14  ;  ye  .  .  . 
tuiches,  xi,  46  ;  £/e  2/owr  se//*  entris,  XI,  52  but  we  ow  se/f  /iawe  Aerde, 
xxn,  71 ;  ^Aay  labour  nocht,  nouthir  spynnis,  xn,  27  ;  ye  Phariseis 
clengis,  xi,  39. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

(a)  Personal  pronoun  -j-  verb :  thai  gang,  iv,  36 ;  ye  met,  vi, 
38  ;  thai  ga,  vm,  13  ;  thai  obey,  vm,  25 ;  thai  cum,  xvn,  1 ;  ^«* 
do,  XVIII,  34 ;  ye  hope,  VI,  34 ;  thai  beteue,  vin,  13 ',  we  perise, 
VIII,  24  ;  </iai  en^Ve  and  duette,  XI,  26  ;  ^e  our  self  haue,  xxn,  71. 

(6)  Verb  -\-  personal  pronoun  :  haf  we,  iv,  23  ;  think  ye,  v,  22 ; 
do  ye,  vi,  2 ;  cal  ye,  vi,  46 ;  say  ye,  ix,  20 ;  unbind  ye,  xix,  33 ; 
Quhy  ete  ye  and  drink  f  v,  30 ;  slepe  ye,  xxn,  46  ;  seke  ye,  XXIV,  5. 

There  are  three  instances  of  the  uninflected  plural  used  with  the 
relative  pronoun  :  almen  that  duett,  xm,  4;  thai  that  haue  money, 
xvm,  24  ;  thai  that  haue  power,  xxn,  25. 

The  imperative  plural  is  uninflected  throughout :  mak  ye,  in,  4 ; 
joy  ye,  vi,  24 ;  lufe  ye,  VI,  27 ;  blesse  ye,  vi,  28 ;  unbind  ye  him, 
and  bring  to  me,  xix,  30.  In  every  instance  the  subject-pronoun 
is  expressed,  although  it  may  be  remote  from  the  verb  as  in  ga 
away  fra  me,  at  ye  wirkaris  of  wickitnes,  xm,  27. 

The  form  of  the  second  infinitive  in  suffir  me  first  to  ga  and 
beryse  my  fader,  ix,  59  is  due  to  the  analogy  of  words  from  the 
French  like  peryss,  perisch.1 

Gavin  Douglas — Translation  of  the  Aeneid.2     (c.  1525.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  two,  wourdis  gais,  11,  28;  logitianis  knawis, 
15,  13 ;  Troianis  frakkis,  24, 12 ;  wallis  risis,  46, 11  ;  fludes  rynnis, 
56,  7 ;  expositouris  .  .  .  makis,  14,  20 ;  Italianis  .  .  .  callis 
(:  wallis),  28,  21 ;  salis  the  Troianis,  24,  3 ;  risis  yone  large  wallis, 
42,  15. 

lCf.  N.  E.D.8.v.lbury.' 

2  Ed.  John  Small,  The  Poetical  Works  of  Gavin  Douglas,  Edinburgh,  1874.  I 
have  selected  the  Prologue  and  the  first  book  of  the  Aeneid. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     57 

2.  Indefinite  adjective-subject:  sum  cheisis,  45,  16. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject :  thai  quhilk  haitis,  42,  7  ;  quhilk  .  .  . 
remanis,  24,  3;  buikis  .  .  .  quhilk  contenis,  11,  8. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  thai  ceis  and  .  .  .  gewis,  30,  26  ; 
we  .  .  .  hes,  36,  4 ;  ^e  ...  hes,  42,  32. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

1.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  we  se  (:  tre),  12,  23  ;  (:  he),  64,  20  ; 
ge  fynd,  14,  6 ;  thai  say  (:  away),  28,  20 ;  (:  Hisperia),  51,  26  ; 
thai  ceis,  30,  26 ;  we  ken  (:  men),  36,  10 ;  we  neid,  52,  24 ;  thai  sa 
{:  Phrygia),  56,  28 ;  thai  us  deny  (:  by),  52,  11 ;  we  gou  pray,  57, 
12 ;  we  compile,  15,  24 ;  pai  mene  (:  Iwene),  15,  28  ;  haue  ge,  33,  16. 

2.  JSToun-subject :  heir  and  thair  stand  large  cragis  and  brais, 
31,  12  ;   Ciclopes  dwell  (-.fell),  33,  18. 

O.     Endings  in  -th  : 

Thi  saivis  in  sic  eloquence  doith  fleit,  5,  17 ;  doith  clerkis,  10,  7  ; 
thair  doith  ane  hundrelh  altaris  stand,  44,  30 ;  fatis  .  .  .  haith 
{:  braith),  52,  21. 

In  addition  to  these  four  cases  in  the  plural,  the  ending  -th 
occurs  five  times  in  the  third  singular :  the  rois  .  .  .  doith  excell, 
3,  16;  also  13,  14;  56,  9;  61,  13;  and  66,  13  where  -th  follows 
-s :  Albeit  my  spreit  abhorris,  and  doith  grise.  The  contracted  form 
in  the  third  singular  occurs  once :  now  slant  the  chief  police,  10, 17. 

Inflected  and  uninflected  forms  are  used  interchangeably  in  the 
imperative  plural  when  the  subject  is  not  expressed  :  traistis,  8,  25  ; 
9,  13;  11,  1,  but  traste,  9,  20  and  traist  with  remote  subject,  11, 
22;  gewis,  19,  11  but  reid,  17,  9;  pluk,  33,  39;  and  be,  33,  26. 
Transition  from  the  inflected  to  the  uninflected  form  often  occurs : 
reidis  .  .  .  and  cast,  11,  26;  beis  .  .  .  do,  19,  9;  beis  .  .  .  con- 
siddir  .  .  .  reid,  6,  22.  Here  one  case  of  inflection  is  felt  to  be 
sufficient  for  the  whole  context,  and  consequently  the  first  verb  is 
the  one  inflected.  'The  inflected  form  occasionally  intrudes  into  the 
imperative  singular  :  beis,  40,  18. 

The  influence  of  Southern  literary  models  on  Douglas  is  also 
revealed  by  the  frequent  use  of  bene  instead  of  ar  in  the  present 
indicative  plural.  The  use  of  is  with  a  plural  subject  occurs  once  : 
stickis  .  .  .  laid  is,  32,  9.  A  preceding  plural  subject  is  also  found 
with  was:  cupplis  festnyt  was  (:  bras),  4630,  and  poetis  that  sens 


58     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

was,  5,  14.  In  the  first  singular,  -is  occurs  three  times  :  J  .  .  . 
speikis,  6,  28 ;  I  defend  and  forbiddis,  12,  9;  I  that  .  .  .  tursis, 
43,4. 

The  Complaynt  of  Scotlande.1     (1548  or  1549.) 

A.  Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  inuasions  aperis,!,  13;  battellis  consistis,  15, 
24 ;   dominions  altris,  dechaeis,  ande  cummis,  21,  27 ;  volfis  .  .  . 
hes,  2,  23 ;  childir  .  .  .  grouis  and  incressis,  20,  7 ;  hes  bene  diuerse 
translatours,  16,  19. 

2.  Adjective-subject :    mony  of  us  beleuis,  32,  5 ;    mony  of  us 
ihynkis,  32,  14 ;  ane  hundretht  lyuis,  35,  20. 

3.  Relative  pronoun-subject:  plagis  quhilk  hes,  I,  15;    enemeis 
that  lyis,  4,  2;  them  that  fechtis,  15,  4;  thai  that  imputis,  22,  17; 
vs  that  professiSj  31,  9  ;  quhilk  prouokis,  34,  12. 

4.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  ge  daly  of  g our  gudnes  induris,  3, 
20 ;  thai  see,  or  heris  tel,  14,  8  ;  ve  seik  .  .  .  nor  resistis,  34,  33. 

B.  Uninflected  forms : 

ve  hef,  17,  15;  tha  begyn,  20,  9;  ve  hold,  31,  23;  ve  thynk,  32, 
14 ;  ve  cal,  32,  33  ;  ve  pas,  34,  17  ;  ve  beeum,  34,  34 ;  thai  persaue, 
9,  19;  thaipleyse,  20,  1 ;  ve  beleue,  32,  10;  ve  adhere,  34,  27. 

There  are  seven  instances  of  is  with  a  plural  subject.  In  each 
case  the  subject  follows  the  verb :  as,  nor  is  the  famous  atentic 
croniklis,  3,  26 ;  ther  is  mony  vordis,  16,  34.  Was  is  preceded  by 
a  plural  subject  three  times  :  offrandis  that  vas,  8,  3  ;  them  that  vas, 
15,  8  and  9.  The  form  of  the  verb  in  /  .  .  .  hes  tane  is  due  to 
analogy  with  the  second  and  third  singular  when  the  verb  is  re- 
mote from  its  subject. 

Sir  David  Lyndsay. — The  Dreme  and  The  Testament  and 
Complaynt  of  the  Papyngo.2     (c.  1550.) 

A.     Endings  in  -s. 

1.  Noun-subject:  clerkis  dois,  D,  349  and  495;  Poetis  callis, 
394 ;  Astrologis  sayis  (:  dayis),  400 ;  wolfis  cumis,  899 ;  dayis 

1  Ed.  Murray,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  Extra  Series,  xvii  and  xviu,  1872.     I  have  selected 
Ane  Epistil  to  the  Qvenis  Grace,  the  Prolog  to  the  Redar,  and  the  first  five  chapters 
of  the  Complaynt. 

2  The  Poetical  Works  of  Sir  David  Lyndsay  of  the  Mount,  edited  by  David  Laing, 
Edinburgh,  1871. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     59 

induris,  P,  321 ;    clatter  aris  loupis,  391 ;    Inglismen  say  is,   575 ; 
wyffis  .  .  .  cry  is,  712;  faces  provokis,  868. 

2.  Relative  pronoun-subject:    thame  that  fixis,  D,  133 ;    stedys 
that  drawis,  438 ;  the  quhilkis  excellentlye  makis,  521 ;  the  quhilkis 
hes,  886 ;  quho  dois,  P,  399 ;  that  .  .  .  dois,  982. 

3.  Personal  pronoun-subject :  thay  wyrk  .  .  .  and  hes,  945.     In 
this  example  where  the  verb  is  remote  from  its  pronominal  subject, 
the  form  in  -s  is  normal.     But  in  God  wot  geve  we  hes  neid  of  lyves 
fude,  674,  the  inflected  form  stands  in  direct  contact  with  the  per- 
sonal pronoun,  which  fact  affords  ground  for  the  suspicion  that  the 
text  is  at  fault. 

B.     Uninflected  forms. 

1.  Personal  pronoun  -f-  verb  :  thay  se,  D,  326  ;  thay  heir,  327  ; 
we  want,  829  ;  thay  call,  931 ;  thay  dispone,  206  ;  thay  move,  506  ; 
thay  do,  P,  39  ;  ye  get,  624;  thay  stand,  644;  ye  haif,  691 ;  thai 
persaue,  713;  thayjuge,  758;  we  thee  beseik,  742. 

2.  Verb  -j-  personal  pronoun  :  laik  we,  D,  826 ;  want  we,  873  ; 
traist  ye,  P,  855  ;  mak  ye,  1155. 

In  Lyndsay  the  imperative  plural  is  uninflected  even  when  the 
subject-pronoun  is  not  expressed :  imprent,  P,  348 ;  Lat  .  .  .  traist, 
371 ;  marke,  521  ;  presume,  600;  be,  1011  ;  depart,  1090. 

The  Midland  plural  bene  instead  of  the  Northern  ar  is  very 
common  in  the  present  indicative.  Its  frequent  use  with  a  singu- 
lar subject  suggests  misapprehension  on  the  part  of  Lyndsay  as  to 
its  true  grammatical  significance :  the  trew  translatioun  Of  Virgill, 
quhilk  bene  consolatioun,  P,  34 ;  no  thyng  bene,  213 ;  ilke  court  bene, 
367  ;  One  thyng  thare  bene,  441 ;  My  wytt  bene  waik,  474  ;  Quhare 
Christ  bene  kyng,  613;  thy  burgh  bene,  645;  me  that  bene,  734. 
There  are  two  instances  of  is  with  a  plural  subject :  Thare  is  none 
eiris,  D,  594,  and  thare  is  few,  944.  It  has  intruded  into  the  first 
singular  in  I  Quhilk  cummyng  is,  D,  155,  the  extension  being 
favored  by  the  analogy  of  I  persave  .  .  .  and  considderis,  816,  and 
Jam  ...  and  hes,  P,  671. 

Southern  influence  is  betrayed  by  the  numerous  endings  in  -th 
both  in  the  singular  :  JEuropa  doith  stand,  D,  674 ;  My  syster  .  .  » 
haith,  948  :  sapience  transcendith,  P,  9 ;  quhilk  desyrith,  44 ;  one 
doith  oppresse,  334,  and  in  the  plural :  wolfis  .  .  .  doith,  D,  912; 
quhilks  kepith,  P,  73;  Poetis  of  me  haith,  203;  peple  sayith,  770. 


60     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

The  investigation  of  the  inflection  of  the  present  plural  indica- 
tive has  also  been  carried  through  parts  or  the  whole  of  the 
following  texts,  which  observe  the  same  distinctions  in  the  use  of 
the  plural  forms  as  those  already  treated  :  Evangelium  Nicodemi, 
edited  by  C.  Horstman  (Herrig's  Archiv,  LIII,  389-424);  The 
Kingis  Quair,  edited  by  W.  W.  Skeat  (S.  T.  S.,  1884);  Ratis 
Raving,  edited  by  J.  R.  Lumby  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  1870);  Rauf  Coil- 
year  and  Sir  Richard  Holland's  The  Buke  of  the  Howlat,  both  edited 
by  F.  J.  Amours  (Scottish  Alliterative  Poems  in  Riming  Stanzas, 
S.  T.  S.,  1892-97);  Henry  the  Minstrel's  Schir  William  Wallace, 
edited  by  James  Moir  (S.  T.  S.,  1885-89) ;  John  Bellenden's 
Translation  of  Livy's  History  of  Rome,  edited  by  W.  A.  Craigie 
(S.  T.  S.,  1901);  The  Historie  and  Chronicles  of  Scotland  by 
Robert  Lindesay  of  Pitscottie,  edited  by  M.  J.  G.  Mackay  (S.  T.  S., 
1899 ;  also  Thomas  of  Erceldoune,  edited  by  Brandl  (Sammlung 
engl.  Denkmaler  in  Jcritischen  Ausgaben,  II,  Berlin,  1880) ;  The 
Pistill  of  Susan,  The  Awntyrs  off  Arthure  at  the  Terne  Wathelyne, 
and  The  Knightly  Tale  of  Golagros  and  Gawane,  edited  by  F.  J. 
Amours  (S.  T.  S.,  1892-97). 


CONCLUSION. 

To  sum  up  in  conclusion  the  historical  development  of  the  forms 
of  the  plural,  we  find  that  in  Early  Northern  the  inflections  -p  and 
-s  are  used  without  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  subject.  This  is  not 
the  case,  however,  with  the  vocalic  endings,  which  are  used  only 
when  the  subject  is  a  personal  pronoun  in  immediate  contact  with 
the  verb.  If  the  verb  is  separated  from  its  personal  pronoun-sub- 
ject by  only  one  word,  the  Early  Northern  texts  unite  in  presenting 
the  full  form  in  -p  or  -s  for  the  indicative  plural.  The  verb  likewise 
assumes  the  full  inflection  when  the  subject  is  unexpressed,  but  to  this 
rule  there  are  two  exceptions,  both  occurring  in  the  Ritual. 

As  we  advance  to  Middle  Northern,  the  first  striking  phenome- 
non we  meet  is  the  total  disappearance  of  the  inflection  -p.  The  -s 
of  the  Early  Northern  still  persists,  whereas  all  the  vocalic  endings 
have  been  reduced  to  -(e),  which  is  usually  without  syllabic  value  in 
texts  as  early  as  the  Cursor  Mundi  and  the  Surtees  Psalter.  But  a 
change  has  taken  place  in  the  functions  of  these  endings.  Economy 
of  speech  demanded  that  the  work  assigned  to  the  inflected  and  the 
uninflected  form  should  be  more  highly  specialized.  The  loss  in 
definiteness  under  the  old  system  of  two  overlapping  uses  was 
gradually  repaired  by  a  process  of  adjustment  in  the  language  itself. 
Forms  like  we  biddas,  gie  stondas,  hia  cymes,  haldas  hia  are  re- 
placed by  we  bid,  ge  stond,  pai  cum,  hald  pal,  the  beginnings  of 
which  process  are  seen  in  the  we  behalda  usig  and  the  habba  we  of 
the  Early  Northern.  The  uninflected  form  gradually  became 
associated  with  a  personal  pronoun-subject  in  direct  contact  with 
the  verb  and,  this  having  once  been  consciously  felt,  its  use  was 
extended  to  all  such  cases  to  the  exclusion  of  the  form  in  -s.  The 
presence  of  the  pronoun  was  felt  to  be  a  sufficiently  clear  exponent 
of  the  form  of  the  verb  without  the  need  of  a  distinct  suffix. 

Therefore  the  ending  -s  is  no  longer  used  regardless  of  the  nature 
of  the  subject,  although  its  range  is  still  much  wider  than  that  of 
the  uninflected  form.  It  is  used  with  every  kind  of  subject  except 
a  personal  pronoun  in  close  contact  with  the  verb,  which  the 
differentiating  process  had  assigned  to  the  uninflected  plural.  The 

61 


62     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

latter,  namely  the  uninfleeted  form,  has  therefore  entered  in  a  fuller 
measure  upon  its  inheritance,  a  partial  possession  of  which  it  had 
already  obtained  in  the  days  of  the  Ritual  and  the  Gospels.  Its 
personality  has  become  so  enlarged  that  the  sphere  of  its  influence 
may  now  reach  out  over  any  non-substantival  word  that  may 
intervene  between  the  verb  and  its  personal  pronominal  subject — 
an  advance  on  the  immediate  contact  demanded  in  Early  Northern. 

As  has  just  been  indicated,  the  nature  of  the  intervening  word, 
or  words,  is  the  all-important  factor  in  determining  the  inflection 
of  the  verb.  If  this  intervening  element  is  a  modifier  of  the 
predicate,  the  uninfleeted  form  is  used.  If  it  is  introduced  to 
explain  or  qualify  the  personal  pronominal  subject,  its  stronger 
personality  dominates  that  of  the  pronoun  and  the  inflected  form  is 
required.  This  distinction  is  illustrated  by  Dunbar  in  the  poem 
beginning  We  Lordis  hes  chosin  but  elsewhere  he  writes  ge  so  blist 
call]  also  by  We  twa  resemblis,  Ratis  Raving,  35  but  As  thai  defalt 
makj  375.  For  this  reason  ye  your  self  entris,  Luke  xi,  52  is  to  be 
preferred  to  we  our  self  haue  herde,  Luke  xxn,  71.  Very  rarely 
there  occurs  a  justifiable  use  of  the  inflected  form  even  though  the 
verb  is  the  next  word  after  the  personal  pronoun-subject.  This 
may  happen  when  the  subject-pronoun  is  at  the  end  of  a  verse  and 
the  verb  is  the  first  word  in  the  next  succeeding  verse,  as  that  yhit 
we  I  Callys  hyr  natyvyte,  Wyntoun,  vn,  2880,  where  a  pause  sepa- 
rates the  subject  from  the  predicate. 

How  great  may  be  the  distance  between  the  pronominal  subject 
and  the  uninfleeted  verb,  in  case  the  intervening  words  are  parts  of 
the  predicate,  varies  with  different  authors  and  even  at  different 
times  in  the  same  author.  For  example,  in  the  Lay  Folks'  Cate- 
chism, there  occurs  we  sklaundir  or  backbite  but  we  gete  or  tas.  There 
is,  however,  a  general  tendency  among  Northern  writers  to  use  the 
inflected  form  if  two  or  more  words  separate  the  verb  from  its 
subject.  This  tendency  is  sometimes  counteracted  by  the  require- 
ments of  the  rime,  which  may  cause  a  verb  to  assume  the  unin- 
fleeted form  although  the  personal  pronominal  subject  is  remote 
from  the  predicate.  The  requirements  of  the  rime  may  also  cause 
the  use  of  the  uninfleeted  form  with  a  noun,  an  adjective,  or  a 
relative  pronoun,  but  this  is  much  less  frequent  than  in  the  case  of 
a  personal  pronoun-subject.  The  fact  that  poetic  license  allows 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  ike  Present  Indicative  Plural.     63 

uninflected  forms  in  the  rime  in  constructions  that  demand  the  full 
form  elsewhere  shows  the  danger  incurred  by  those  who  attempt  to 
infer  the  current  speech-usage  from  the  rime-words  alone.  When 
it  is  remembered  that  formal  poetry  often  preserves  archaic  types 
and  modes  of  expression  not  found  in  contemporary  prose,  such 
inferences  must  be  considered  hazardous  unless  reinforced  by  con- 
clusions drawn  from  the  usage  of  prose  or  from  the  language  of 
popular  poetry. 

When  two  singular  nouns  or  a  noun  and  a  singular  pronoun  are 
used  conjointly  as  subject,  it  is  frequently  impossible  to  tell  by  the 
form  of  the  verb  whether  it  is  meant  to  be  singular  or  plural. 
The  old  usage  allowing  such  subjects  to  be  taken  distributively 
with  a  singular  verb  frequently  affords  a  ready  explanation,  as 
Baith  my  self  and  my  hors  is  reddy,  Rauf  Coilyear,  58.  This 
explanation,  however,  could  not  be  given  to  account  for  Baith  the 
King  and  the  Queue  meitis,  250,  where  the  verb  implies  the  idea  of 
plurality,  or  at  least  of  reciprocal  relation  involving  plurality,  on 
the  part  of  the  subject.  The  form  of  the  verb  may  be  either  sin- 
gular or  plural  in  For  thou  and  sir  John,  pi  sun,  has  kast  me  in  care, 
Minot,  ix,  60.  The  insertion  of  a  word  in  apposition  is  sufficient 
to  cause  the  use  of  the  inflected  form  in  For  my  Gaist  and  I  baith 
cheueris,  Rauf  Coilyear,  96,  which  intervening  word  is  however 
dispensed  with  in  Saynt  Steuen  and  I  ligges  euyn  mete,  Legends,  vi, 
275.  Quite  abnormal  is  the  uninflected  form  in  lie  and  his  menge 
ha  ihoght,  Ywain  and  Gawain,  1215. 

Because  of  the  regular  use  of  the  s-ending  in  the  second  and 
third  singular  and  its  frequent  employment  with  all  the  persons  of 
the  plural,  it  was  analogically  carried  over  into  the  first  singular 
when  the  pronominal  subject  was  at  a  distance  from  its  predicate, 
as  /  with  my  worde  hase  wrothe,  York  Plays,  n,  80 ;  I  knaw,  Bot 
keipis,  Robene  and  Makyne,  11.  The  tendency  to  employ  -s  as  an 
'  absolute '  inflection  for  either  singular  or  plural  was  the  cause  of 
the  frequent  use  of  is  and  was  with  any  plural  subject  except 
a  personal  pronoun  in  contact  with  the  verb.  As  the  examples 
show,  this  usage  was  not  confined  to  expletive  constructions  but 
was  employed  irrespective  of  the  order  of  subject  and  predicate. 

From  the  earliest  times,  the  curtailed  form  with  a  postpositive 
pronominal  subject  could  co-ordinate  in  the  imperative  with  the  full 


64     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

form  used  unconditionally,  as  ncelle  gie  gedoema  cefter  onsione  ah 
sopfcest  dom  gedwmaf,  John  vii,  24  ;  but  the  use  of  the  curtailed  form 
in  the  imperative  was  never  as  general  in  Old  Northumbian  as  in 
classic  West-Saxon.  The  co-ordination  of  the  unconditioned  form 
in  -s  with  the  uninflected  form  used  with  a  postpositive  pronoun 
is  a  common  occurrence  in  Middle  Northern  :  Rises  up,  he  said,  and 
fle  gee  sone,  Cursor  Mundi,  2813,  and  Mi  gestes  late  gee  Hue  in  pees, 
For  scam  ne  dos  pam  na  males,  2794 ;  also  Singes  til  oure  God, 
singe  yhe,  Surtees  Psalter,  XLVII,  7.  To  the  number  of  these  unin- 
flected imperatives  before  a  postpositive  subject-pronoun  must  be 
added  those  plurals  that  were  curtailed  before  a  postpositive  reflexive 
object,  a  procedure  due  to  the  tact  that  an  object-pronoun  used 
without  a  pronominal  subject  was  as  clear  an  exponent  of  the  form 
of  the  verb  as  a  subject-pronoun  used  without  a  pronominal  object, 
as  Avise  yow  wele,  Ywain  and  Gawain,  1511 ;  holde  you,  York  Plays, 
n,  29 ;  mayke  yow,  iv,  55.  The  number  of  uninflected  forms  was 
further  increased  in  Middle  Northern  by  the  use  of  the  curtailed 
plural  without  a  postpositive  pronominal  subject1  or  object,  pro- 
vided that  the  omission  of  the  pronoun  was  supplied  by  a  contigu- 
ous personal  pronoun  used  as  the  subject  of  a  dependent  verb,  as 
Luke  ge  cum,  Ywain  and  Gawain,  1514;  Looke  that  ge  do,  York 
Plays,  iv,  80  ;  and  perhaps  the  extreme  case  Dwell  here  yf  that  ye 
canne,  iv,  29.  Since  the  subject  of  such  a  dependent  verb  was 
rarely  in  immediate  contact  with  the  main  imperative,  the  use  of 
the  uninflected  form  here  was  probably  influenced  by  the  optatives, 
which  were  uninflected  in  all  constructions  and  which  were  used  as 
adhortatives  and  imperatives  in  the  first  and  third  persons.  This 
would  explain  Lokpai  alle  be  tain,  Cursor  Mundi,  4896. 

In  the  Scottish  of  Wyntoun  all  these  principles  are  operative : 
Luk  that  yhe  be  /  Mery  and  glayd,  and  hawys  na  dowt,  vm,  3598  ; 
but  a  freer  use  of  the  uninflected  form  is  seen  in  yhe  supprys  .  .  . 
Off  kyndnes  tharefor  sett  yhoure  thoucht  /  And  thynk  for  yhowe,  IV, 
881.  The  uninflected  form  takes  the  place  of  the  unconditioned 
full  form  in  -s  in  Thynk,  Lordys,  on  Dawy  and  hys  myldness,  vn, 
1222.  The  interchange  of  inflected  and  uninflected  forms,  when 

1  From  the  consideration  of  the  indicative,  it  has  been  seen  that  the  principle 
that  applies  to  the  curtailed  form  when  the  personal  pronoun  is  postpositive  also 
holds  in  Middle  Northern  when  it  is  prepositive  as  well. 


Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural.     65 

not  conditioned  by  a  pronoun,  is  seen  to  the  best  advantage  in 
"  Cum  on  falowis,  be  foremast  ay"  A  pryncis  word  off  honeste 
"  Gais  on,  gais  on,"  suld  nevyr  be,  ix,  3200. 

After  the  loss  of  final  -e,  the  curtailed  imperative  plural  of  most 
strong  verbs  and  of  all  long-stemmed  -Jan-verbs  assumed  the  same 
form  as  the  imperative  singular,  and,  when  the  subject-pronoun 
and  the  name  of  the  object  addressed  were  omitted,  could  not  be  dis- 
tinguished from  it.  Because  of  this  fact,  the  interchange  of  the 
uninflected  with  the  inflected  form  of  the  plural  when  the  subject- 
pronoun  is  unexpressed  may  be  erroneously  regarded  as  the  inter- 
change of  the  imperative  singular  and  plural  in  the  same  speech.1 

The  uninflected  form  in  unconditioned  constructions  gradually 
prevailed  over  the  inflected  plural  of  the  Middle  Northern  impera- 
tive until,  by  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century,  the  use  of  the  latter 
had  become  extremely  rare.  In  Henryson  and  Dunbar,  the  unin- 
flected plural  is  almost  invariably  used,  although  the  Chaucerian 
-th  occasionally  presents  itself.  Douglas,  who  likes  to  preserve  the 
archaic  s-plural,  betrays  his  lack  of  appreciation  for  its  significance 
by  using  it  in  the  singular.  During  this  period  there  is  a  tendency 
to  use  the  -s  with  the  first  imperative  plural  in  a  series  of  two  or 
more  and  to  omit  it  with  the  others.  The  sporadic  cases  of  its  use 
in  the  sixteenth  century  and  afterwards  are  merely  revivals  of  an 
old  form  that  had  become  obsolete. 

On  the  contrary,  the  s-plural  of  the  indicative,  while  diminished 

1  The  use  of  the  uninflected  plural  without  a  pronoun  was  instrumental  in 
bringing  about  an  apparent  interchange  of  the  singular  and  plural  imperative  in 
Chaucer.  The  ambiguity  of  Ten  Brink's  language  ($  189)  in  treating  the  cur- 
tailed forms  of  the  plural  is  misleading.  And  G.  L.  Kittredge  in  discussing  this 
point  ( Observ.  on  the  Lang,  of  Chaucer's  Troilus,  $  118)  regards  these  uninflected 
forms  in  the  plural  as  borrowings  from  the  singular :  '  Forms  in  -e  (apocopated) 
or  without  ending  also  occur,  and  some  of  these  may  be  due  to  an  extension  of 
the  singular  form  to  the  plural  or  to  the  petrifaction  of  a  singular  in  an  idiomatic 
use.  Cf.  especially  lat  in  the  periphrasis  lot  us  with  infinitive  (latteth  is  altogether 
unknown  to  Chaucer):'  The  phrase  lat,  us  cited  by  Professor  Kittredge,  although 
an  imperative  in  form,  really  represents  the  old  adhortatival  optative  in  -en 
which  we  find  curtailed  to  -e  with  a  postpositive  subject-pronoun  as  early  as 
Alfred,  and  with  a  postpositive  object-pronoun  in  the  Ancren  Riwle.  From  this 
viewpoint  the  Chaucerian  lat  us  is  perhaps  better  explained  as  the  curtailment  of 
an  original  plural  than  as  '  the  petrifaction  of  a  singular  in  an  idiomatic  use,'  as 
Professor  Kittredge  suggests. 

6 


66     Middle  English  Inflections  of  the  Present  Indicative  Plural. 

in  number  by  the  frequent  substitution  of  plurals  in  -n  or  -th  by 
the  Scottish  Chaucerians,  never  lost  its  vitality.  Contemporaneous 
with  the  school  of  Chaucer,  -s  is  the  only  form  of  the  uncon- 
ditioned plural  in  popular  speech  and  popular  literature.  Although 
in  the  more  formal  literature  of  the  later  Scottish  the  Midland 
uninflected  plural  prevails,  and  although  the  Scottish  already  pos- 
sessed an  uninflected  plural  used  in  the  vicinage  of  a  personal 
pronominal  subject,  so  great  was  the  vitality  of  the  -s  that  it  suc- 
cessfully withstood  the  tendency  to  supplant  it  and  remains  to  the 
present  day  the  unconditioned  inflection  of  the  indicative  plural  in 
the  folk-speech  of  Scotland. 


VITA. 


I  was  born  near  Cedarville,  Warren  county,  Virginia,  May  29, 
1875,  and  was  educated  first  in  public  and  private  schools  in  Loudoun 
county  and  later  at  Koanoke  College.  After  a  four  years'  course  at 
this  institution,  I  was  graduated  in  1895  with  the  degree  of  A.  B. 
The  next  year  I  was  principal  of  a  graded  school  in  Loudoun  county 
and  in  the  summer  of  1896  I  took  a  course  in  physical  training  at  the 
University  of  Virginia.  In  September,  1896,  I  returned  to  Roanoke 
College  as  instructor  in  English  and  physical  director,  which  position 
I  retained  four  years.  During  the  session  of  1897-8  I  fulfilled  the 
requirements  for  the  degree  of  A.  M. 

In  the  summer  of  1900  I  went  abroad  and  became  a  student  of 
English,  German,  Old  Norse,  and  Old  French  at  the  University  of 
Berlin,  under  the  direction  of  Professors  Brandl,  Eric  Schmidt, 
Weinhold,  Heusler,  and  Schultz-Gora.  After  studying  two  semesters 
in  Berlin,  I  returned  to  America  in  the  summer  of  1901  and,  in  the 
following  October,  entered  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  as  a  student 
of  English,  German,  and  French,  under  the  direction  of  Professors 
Bright,  Browne,  Wood,  Vos,  Armstrong,  and  Ogden. 

To  all  of  my  instructors  I  desire  to  express  my  deepfelt  gratitude, 
but  especially  to  Professor  Brandl,  whose  enthusiasm  has  proved  a 
source  of  constant  inspiration,  and  to  Professor  Bright,  whose  generous 
advice  and  just  criticism  have  made  this  dissertation  possible. 


LOAN  DEPT. 

^»^^^b 

Ke^ed^^subiectto^edia^ecaU. 


INTER  LIBRARY 


-'^— ~ 


LD  2lA-50m-3,'62 
(C7097slO)476B 


General  Library 
University  of  California 

Berkeley 


VC  01363 


